6.  /?.  'o  t> 


^ii^Mkmlosk^l^ 


^ 


>^#^*"  ^^%: 


PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


%. 


r« 


r^ 


Presented   by  ^— ^  ^ 


(O^  CKvavVxov. 


BV  813  .P3 
Patten,  Moses 
A  treatise  upon  infant 
baptism 


A 

TREATISE 


UPON 


INFANT  BAPTISM 

BY    / 

y 

MOSES   PATTEN. 


With  an  Introduction 

BY 

Rev.   G.  FREDERICK  WRIGHT,   D.  D.,  LL.  D., 

Professor   of  the   Harmony   of  Science   and   Revelation. 


CONCORD,  N.  H. : 

Zhc  IRumfor^  press 

1S99. 


Eafcered  according  to  an  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1899, 
By  Moses  Patten. 


Published  hy  the  Author 


MY   THREE    CHILDREN 

WHO 

Timitb  tbelr  Deceased  anD  %\vim  /nbotbcrs 

HAVE    TAKEN    SO    GREAT    AN     INTEREST    IN    ITS     PREPARATION, 


(El?e  conftbent  hope  an'b  pleasing  assurance, 

Baseb  upon  Clcrenant  promises,  tl]at  ttiey, 

0,5  cl^ilbren  of  tt^e  dorenant, 


BY    THEIR    GODLY    WALK    AND    CHRISTIAN    LABORS,    BE 

£)bject  Cessons, 

EVER    SETTING    FORTH    MORE    AND    MORE,    THE    CONVERTING 
AND    SANCTIFYING    POWER    OF 

3nfant  Baptism 

AS  A  MEANS  OF  GRACE, 

FAR,  VERY  FAR,  MORE  ELOQUENTLY  AND  IMPRESSIVELY  THAN 
•  THESE,  OR  ANY  OTHER  POOR,  WORDS  OF  MINE  CAN  DO, 

THIS    VOLUME, 

WITH    A    GREAT    DEAL    OF    PLEASURE,    IS    INSCRIBED, 
(WITHOUT    THEIR    KNOWLEDGE) 

Sy  tl^etr  affectionate  ^atl^er. 


PREFACE. 


Infant  Baptism,  like  every  other  important  subject, 
needs,  first  and  most  of  all,  a  thoroughly  exhaustive  trea- 
tise, setting  forth  its  nature  and  proof.  One  to  meet  this 
imperative  demand,  must  be  severely  logical.  As  an 
argument  it  must  be  full,  clear,  candid,  flawless,  and 
convincing.  It  must  confess,  fairly  estimate,  and  com- 
pletely remove  all  the  difficulties  besetting  it.  It  must, 
without  prejudice,  consider  and  actually  refute  all  the 
objections  urged  against  it.  It  must  take  no  disputed 
fact  for  granted;  nor  use,  as  a  basis  of  reasoning,  any  one 
objected  to  as  unfounded,  without  first  having  proved  it. 
It  must  show  objectors  that  the  ordinance  comes  legiti- 
mately and  necessarily  from  those  same  facts  and  princi- 
ples which  they,  themselves,  together  with  all  others, 
confess  and  act  upon  as  fundamental  and  indisputable. 
This  so  essential  treatise  must  meet  all  the  just  demands 
of  every  class,  and,  so,  must  contain  much  which  some 
will  deem  not  needed. 

A  treatise  of  this  kind  having  been  prepared  and  made 
accessible  to  all  by  its  publication,  then,  and  not  until 
then,  the  way  is  open  for  those  of  a  more  popular  charac- 
ter. In  such  it  will  suffice  simply  to  refer  readers  to  that 
exhaustive  work  for  the  full,  thorough,  and  conclusive 
treatment  of  the  parts  omitted,  because  too  severely  tax- 
ing the  thought  and  patience  of  most  readers. 

It  would  be  greatly  out  of  place  for  us  to  claim  to  have 
furnished  such  an  indispensable  production;  but  we  can, 
with  propriety,  and  do,  say  that  this  has  been  our  one 
great  aim.     Of  our  success  the  reader  must  be  the  judge. 

We  have  made  large  use  of  the  word  believer  because 
one  single  one  was  needed  which,  according  to  Old  and 
New  Testament  usage,  was  best  fitted  to  designate  God's 
people  of  both  the  present  and  all  past  ages.  We  have 
also  made  a  large  use  of  the  word  rite,  for  brevity's  sake. 


VI  PREFACE. 

We  have  no  doubt  but  that  some  points  will  fail  to  sur- 
vive the  crucible  of  public  criticism.  All  books  have 
that  experience.  But  we  are  confident  that  none  essen- 
tial to  the  integrity  of  the  argument  will.  It  is  not  to  be 
expected  that  all  the  actually  true  ones  will  meet  with 
the  immediate  assent  of  all  readers.  Points  so  new  and 
startling  as  many  in  this  treatise  are,  will  be  sure  to  call 
forth  more  or  less  of  dissent  and  rekindle  strong  chronic 
prejudices.  But  we  cherish  the  assurance  that  the  candor — 
working  power  of  time,  and  the  silent  influences  of  further 
prolonged  thinking,  will,  sooner  or  later,  bring  about  a 
general  acquiescence  in  all  the  essential  ones  as  well- 
founded —  as  true  as  new.  We  feel  certain  that  they  who 
find  themselves  unable  to  accept  its  main  conclusions 
will  yet  find  many  points  affording  them  much  help  and 
throwing  much  light  upon  their  pathway  in  their  investi- 
gations of  the  subject. 

The  most  searching  criticism  is  solicited.  No  one  can 
be  more  desirous  to  have  every  lurking  fallacy,  if  any, 
brought  to  light  than  its  author. 

A  parting  word  to  the  unconverted  subjects  of  the  rite, 
of  all  ages,  reading  this  book;  my  earnest  prayer  is  that 
its  reading  may  make  you  fully  conscious  of  the  vi^e-like 
grip  which  your  infant  baptisms  have,  and  more  and 
more  will  ever  have,  upon  you. 

We  very  gratefully  acknowledge  our  great  indebtedness 
to  the  following  Fathers  and  Brethren  for  their  kind  and 
patient  listening  to  the  reading  of  more  or  less  of  this 
treatise  in  manuscript,  and  for  their  valuable  sugges- 
tions, words  of  approbation,  and  encouragement: 

Profs.  Edward  A.  Park  and  G.  Frederick  Wright;  Presi- 
dent Cyrus  Hamlin;  Drs.  Joshua  W.  Wellman,  Daniel  L. 
Furber  and  Henry  J.  Patrick;  Revs.  Nathan  F.  Carter, 
Harry  J.  Brickett,  Justin  E.  Burbank,  and  others. 

M.   P. 

HOOKSETT,    N.     H. 


CONTENTS. 


Chapter  Page 

I.     Preliminary  Statements 1-4 

II.     Argument  from  Reason 

Part  I.  Not  Inherently  Wrong  .  .  .  5-25 
III.  Part  II.  Its  Great  Usefulness  .  .  .  .26-51 
lY.     Scriptural  Argument. 

Parti.     Proof  Texts;    Universality  of  Moral 

Precepts  and  Institutions;  Inferences  .         .       52-  69 
V.     Part  II.     Abrahamic  Institutions  Defined  Neg- 
atively              70-87 

VI.     Part  II  con.     Abrahamic  Institutions  Defined 

Positively 88-102 

VI r.     Part  III.     Abrahamic  Institutions  in  the  Pre- 

Abrahamic  Age^ 103-121 

VIII.     Part  IV.     Abrahamic  Institutions  in  the  Abra- 
hamic Age 122-127 

IX.     Part  V.     Abrahamic  Institutions  in  the  Chris- 
tian Age 128-148 

Christian    Church    and    Covenant    Defined     and 
shown  to  be  another  Form  of  the  Abrahamic. 
X.     Part  V  con.     Abrahamic   Institutions  in  the 

Christian  Age 149-160 

Baptism  Defined  and  shown  to  be  another  form 
of  Circumcision;    A  Supposition  gr,anted  in  this 
chapter. 
XI.     Part  V  con.     Abrahamic  Institutions  in  the 

Christian  Age 161-189 

The  Supposition  of  last  chapter  withdrawn;  In- 
fant baptisms  in  the  ministries  of  John,  Christ, 
and  the  Apostles;    Among  Gentile   Believers;  A 
Remarkable  Coincidence;  A  Sea  Voyage. 
XII.     Part  VI.     Concluding  Points      ....     190-206 

XIII.  Historical  Argument. 

Part  I.     Writings  of  Certain  Fathers  in  the 

First  Five  Centuries 207-224 

XIV.  Part  II.     Other  Related  Historical  Facts:  Clos- 

ing Words  225-238 

Appendix  A.  Baptized  into  the  Name  of  the  Trinity  240-246 
Appendix  B.  Of  Such  is  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  .  247-251 
Appendix  C.     The  Mode-Question  in  a  Nutshell         .     252^258 


INTRODUCTION. 


So  long  as  Christianity  maintains  its  preeminence  in 
the  world,  everything  pertaining  to  it  will  derive  from  the 
connection  interest  and  importance.  Discussions  con- 
cerning the  form  of  church  government,  concerning  the 
nature  and  significance  of  the  sacraments,  concerning  the 
use  or  disuse  of  liturgies  and  of  artistic  music  in  church 
worship,  as  well  as  those  concerning  the  proper  perspec- 
tive to  be  given  to  the  several  doctrines  in  a  systematic 
statement  of  fundamental  beliefs,  will  be  carried  on  Avith 
a  vigor  which  is  out  of  all  proportion  to  the  importance 
of  the  things  in  themselves,  but  which  is  accounted  for 
and  justified  by  the  vital  relation  which  these  practices 
are  thought  to  sustain  to  the  propagation  and  mainte- 
nance of  Christianity  in  the  world.  In  the  light  of  expe- 
rience and  of  a  true  knowledge  of  human  nature,  it  is  idle 
to  contend  that  the  divisions  which  separate  the  Christian 
world  are  all  of  them  based  on  matters  of  trifling  concern. 
These  divisions  certainly  have  not  been  trifling,  but  have 
been  among  the  most  serious  facts  in  history;  and,  so  far 
as  we  can  see,  they  can  be  removed  and  avoided  in  the 
future  only  by  such  discussion  as  shall  bring  the  disagree- 
ing parties  to  see  the  truth  in  the  same  light. 

The  significance  of  baptism  a.nd  the  question  of  the 
subjects  to  whom  it  can  properly  be  applied  are  not 
among  the  unessential  points  of  Christian  doctrine,  but 
are  questions  whose  settlement  aff'ects  the  whole  range  of 
Christian  thought  and  practice.  The  doctrine  of  bap- 
tismal, regeneration  which  has  been  so  closely  connected 
with  the  practice  of  infant  baptism  determines  the  char- 
acter of  a  large  part  of  the  activities  of  the  churches  main- 
taining it.     Its  lamentable  results  we  see  in  the  Catholic, 


X  INTRODUCTION. 

the  Greek,  and  the  Armenian  churches,  and  to  some  ex- 
tent in  some  branches  of  the  Protestant  church.  In  the 
effort  to  maintain  the  proper  belief  in  the  connection  of 
regeneration  with  repentance  and  faith,  and  to  secure  a 
regenerate  church  membership,  it  is  becoming  increas- 
ingly difficult  for  the  evangelical  churches  to  retain  the 
practice  of  infant  baptism. 

For,  even  according  to  the  Congregational  creed  of 
1883,  the  baptism  both  of  believers  and  their  children  is 
a  "sign  of  cleansing  from  sin,  of  union  to  Christ,  and  of 
the  impartation  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  In  the  application 
of  this  definition,  it  has  been  difficult  to  avoid  regarding 
children  as  church  members,  and  so  as  really  regenerate 
persons.  Those  advocates  of  infant  baptism  who  deny 
baptismal  regeneration  and  still  speak  of  baptized  chil- 
dren as  members  of  the  church,  usually  qualify  the  des- 
ignation, and  speak  of  them  as  "potential,"  or  "incho- 
ate," or  "infant"  members,  or  as  members  "in  some 
sort,"  or  "in  a  very  qualified  sense."  In  so  doing,  they 
give  such  a  generic  meaning  to  the  word  "member"  that 
little  practical  use  can  be  made  of  it,  without  prefixing  an 
adjective  defining  the  species.  The  word  becomes  about 
as  definite  as  "vertebrate"  would  be  in  defining  man. 
It  states  one  thing;  but  that  one  thing  is  so  general  that 
crocodiles  and  dodos  and  gorillas  are  included  in  it,  as 
well  as  men.  By  such  a  reduction  of  the  meaning  of  the 
word  "member,"  it  is  made  to  include  everybody  for 
whom  the  church  has  any  sort  of  responsibility,  even 
excommunicated  members.  So  when  we  wish  to  speak  of 
the  real  thing  of  membership,  we  have  to  say,  "members 
in  full,"  or  in  "complete  standing,"  or  "actual  mem- 
bers," or  "adult  members." 

Dr.  Bushnell  uses  language  which  is  specially  strong 
in  advocating  the  church  membership  of  baptized  chil- 
dren. Those,  and  they  are  many,  who  do  not  understand 
the  personal  equation  of  this  brilliant  writer  so  as  to  make 


INTRODUCTION.  XI 

due  allowance  for  the  vivid  rhetoric  under  which  he  was 
accustomed  to  conceal  his  ideas,  are  likely  to  underesti- 
mate the  depth  of  meaning  which  he  really  gave  to  regen- 
eratio^i.  Dr.  Bushnell  says,  that  as  all  colts  are  horses, 
and  all  lambs  are  sheep,  "so  children  are  all  men  and 
women,  and  if  there  is  any  law  of  futurition  in  them  to 
justify  it,  may  be  fitly  classed  as  believing  men  and 
women.  .  .  .  The  conception,  then,  of  this  member- 
ship is  that  it  is  a  potentially  real  one;  that  it  stands,  for 
the  present,  in  the  faith  of  the  parents  and  the  promise 
which  is  to  them  and  their  children;  and  that  on  this 
ground  they  may  well  enough  be  accounted  believers, 
just  as  they  are  accounted  potentially  men  and  women. 
Then,  as  they  come  forward  into  maturity,  it  is  to  be  as- 
sumed that  they  will  come  forward  into  faith,  being  grown 
in  the  nurture  of  faith,  and  will  claim  for  themselves  the 
membership  into  w^hich  they  were  before  inserted."  He 
says  of  the  exclusion  of  children  from  the  church  till  they 
give  evidence  of  conversion,  that  in  this  view  Christianity 
"gives  to  little  children  the  heritage  only  of  Cain,  re- 
quiring them  to  be  driven  out  from  the  presence  of  the 
Lord,  and  grow  up  there  among'the  outside  crew  of  aliens 
and  enemies." 

Twenty-five  years  ago  the  discussion  of  these  questions 
came  to  a  crisis  in  New  England,  especially  in  two  arti- 
cles in  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  in  which  the  Baptists  urged 
with  great  force  the  difficulty  of  preserving  the  prevail- 
ing New  England  standard  of  regenerate  church  member- 
ship while  practising  infant  baptism. ^  On  the  other  side, 
the  advocates  of  infant  baptism  seemed  too  readily  to 
accept  the  statement  that  baptized  children  are  actually 
church  members.  In  this  discussion  I  was  asked  to  take 
a  part.  The  results  of  the  protracted  personal  study  and 
conference  at  that  time  given  to  the  subject  may  be  found 
in  two  extended  articles  on  "Infant  Baptism  and  Church 

1  Vol.  xxviii  (1871),  pp.  262-301;  xsix  (1872),  pp.  665-698. 


xii  INTRODUCTION. 

Membership  "  in  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  Vol.  XXXI,  pp. 
265-299,  545-575.  During  the  period  of  this  preparation 
it  was  my  privilege  to  form  the  acquaintance  of  Kev. 
Moses  Patten,  the  author  of  the  present  volume,  and  to 
hold  many  conferences  with  him  and  with  Professor  Park. 
Already  at  this  time  Mr.  Patten  was  deeply  engrossed  in 
the  study  of  the  subject,  and  had  thought  his  way  through 
it  along  the  lines  which  are  mainly  adhered  to  in  the 
present  volume. 

Mr.  Patten's  completed  work  has  the  advantage,  there- 
fore, of  being  the  product  of  the  study  of  a  lifetime;  for, 
from  that  day  to  this,  he  has  adhered  to  the  single  pur- 
pose of  presenting  his  solution  of  the  intricate  subjects 
involved.  To  accomplish  this  he  has  read  widely,  thought 
deeply,  and  written  and  rewritten  perseveringly,  until 
there  is  not  an  obscure  paragraph  or  sentence  in  his  book. 
Whether  one  accepts  his  solution  or  not'  the  reader  will, 
from  beginning  to  end,  be  conscious  that  he  is  dealing 
with  no  immature  and  hasty  effort,  but  with  an  argument 
that  has  been  thoroughly  thought  out  with  full  knowledge 
of  all  the  difficulties  encountered.  As  such  I  can  heartily 
commend  it,  with  a  hop'e  and  expectation  that  it  will  be 
widely  read,  and  will  render  effective  help  in  leading  all 
parties  to  see  more  clearly  the  true  nature  of  the  moment- 
ous questions  involved  in  the  rite  of  infant  baptism. 

G.  Feedekick  Weight. 
Obeelin,  Oct.  24,  1899. 


INFANT   BAPTISM. 


CHAPTER   I. 

Preliminary  Statements. 

I.  The  Theory:  Its  Title  and  Main  and  Essential 
Points;  Points  Disputed  and,  so,  Demanding 
Peooe;  Main  Divisions  of  Argument. 

I.    ITS    THEORY. 

A  clear  and  correct  conception  of  what  Infant 
Baptism  professes  to  be,  will  help  us  the  better  to 
examine  and  test  its  claims  to  our  acceptance.  We 
will,  therefore,  to  begin  with,  give  a  brief  statement 
of  what  we  understand  to  be  its  theory.  In  doing 
this,  and  in  this  entire  treatise,  we  shall  simply  state 
our  own  views,  making  no  claim  to  speak  for  others. 

ITS    TITLE. 

Infant  Baptism,  according  to  the  theory  now 
being  given,  has  for  its  full  and  accurate  title,  the 
following :  Christian  Baptism,  as  administered  by 
believing  parents  and  the  church  of  which  they  are 
members,  to  the  children — both  the  believing  and 
non-believing — of  such  parents ;  and,  also,  to  all  the 
other  members  of  their  households — the  believing 
and  non-believing — who  occupy  in  them  a  position 
similar  to,  and  substantially  the  same  as,  that  of  chil- 
dren. 

2 


2  INFAKT   BAPTISM. 

ITS   MAIN   AND   ESSENTIAL   POINTS. 

Infant  Baptism,  as  we  understand  its  claims,  in- 
volves and  rests  upon  the  following  points  :  1.  Par- 
ents are  the  divinely  appointed  guardians  of  their 
children  ;  under  obligations  to  support  them  ;  to  con- 
secrate them  to  God ;  to  lay  them  upon  God's  altar 
as  his ;  to  bind  them  permanently  to  his  service  ;  to 
impose  upon  them  all  the  duties  and  responsibilities 
of  believers  ;  in  a  word,  to  bring  them  up,  by  a  wise 
and  faithful  nurture,  for  God — to  be  his  for  time  and 
eternity. 

2.  Their  church  sustains  a  similar  relation — part- 
ners with  them  in  this  their  high  calling  as  the 
guardians  of  their  children. 

3.  God  graciously  enters  into  covenant  with  all 
parents  and  their  church  endeavoring  faithfully  to 
perform  these  their  bounden  duties,  in  which  he 
promises  the  bestowment  of  rich  blessings  upon  their 
children — especially  and  preeminently  to  make  them 
true  believers. 

4.  Their  children  are  bound  by  all  such  obliga- 
tions imposed  upon  them.  The  parents  and  church 
are  not  the  only  ones  imposing  these  bonds.  They 
do  it  in  unison  with  God  and  all  other  faithful,  moral 
beings.  They  find  them  already  imposed  upon  them, 
and  simply  add  to  their  authority  and  sacredness. 

5.  These  peculiar  duties,  responsibilities,  and  priv- 
ileges are,  by  divine  appointment,  symbolized  by  the 
church  ordinance  of  Christian  Baptism. 

6.  God,  in  making  Christian  Baptism  a  symbol  of 
the  sacredness  and  the  surety  of  this  his  mutual 
covenant  between  himself  and  believers,  constituted 


ARGUMENT  FROM  REASON.  6 

it  a  solemn  seal  of  that  covenant,  by  which  he  bound 
himself,  as  with  an  oath,  to  its  certain  fulfilment. 

7.  Christian  Baptism  is  a  divinely-appointed  sym- 
bol of  a  believer,  and  faith  on  the  part  of  its  subject 
is  absolutely  essential  to  its  validity  as  it  respects 
himself.  No  one  destitute  of  faith  can  possibly  be  a 
baptized  person. 

8.  Christian  Baptism,  by  divine  appointment,  may, 
and,  in  proper  circumstances  and  for  probationary 
purposes,  should,  be  administered  to  non-believing 
children. 

9.  These  two  points  (7  and  8)  apparently  so 
mutually  contradictory,  are  in  perfect  harmony — 
reverse  hemispheres  exactly  fitting  each  other  and, 
together,  making  one  and  the  same  globe — truth. 

10.  God's  Peculiar  People  of  the  Abrahamic  age 
were  a  church  of  God  and  are  correctly  designated 
as  the  Abrahamic  church. 

11.  The  Abrahamic  and  the  Christian,  are  one  and 
the  same  church — the  latter  only  a  new  and  higher 
development  of  the  one,  and  only  one,  church  of 
God  upon  earth. 

12.  The  Abrahamic  and  Christian  covenants  are, 
in  a  like  sense,  one  and  the  same. 

13.  Baptism  in  the  Christian  church  is  the  same 
identical  rite  with  circumcision  in  the  Abrahamic — 
two  different  forms  of  one  and  the  same  ordinance. 

Such  is  the  theory  of  Infant  Baptism  as  we  under- 
stand it ;  and  the  work  before  us  is  to  show  that  it 
so  rests  upon  such  corresponding  facts  as  fully  to 
establish  its  truthfulness. 


4  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

II.   DISPUTED   POINTS    DEMANDING   PROOF. 

Some  of  these  points  in  this  theory  will  not  be 
questioned  and  so  call  for  no  proof.  Only  in  the 
case  of  the  following  disputed  ones  is  there  a  demand 
for,  or  need  of,  demonstration  in  this  treatise. 

(1).  The  right  of  the  parents  and  the  church  to 
bind  their  children  to  the  service  of  God ;  to  impose 
such  solemn  obligations  without  their  consent.  (2). 
Children  thus  made  more  responsible  for  that  ser- 
vice ;  under  greatly  increased  obligations  to  render 
to  God  that  service  because  thus  imposed.  (3). 
Their  right  to  administer  to  non-believing  children  a 
rite  which  is  a  symbol  of  a  believer  and,  also,  a  sym- 
bol of  all  the  duties,  responsibilities,  obligations, 
promises,  etc.,  set  forth  in  this  theory.  (4).  The 
alleged  fact  that  Christian  Baptism  is  a  seal  of  God's 
covenant  with  believers.  (5).  The  alleged  harmony 
between  the  baptismal  symbol,  as  a  divinely-consti- 
tuted badge  of  a  believer,  and  the  non-belief  of  the 
children  to  whom  it  is  administered.  (6).  The 
alleged  fact  that  God's  Peculiar  People  were  a 
church.  (7).  The  identity  of  the  two  churches, 
that  of  the  two  covenants  and  that  of  the  two  rites. 
As  these  are  the  only  ones  of  the  points  named  in 
the  theory  to  be  established  wdiich  will  be  disputed, 
our  great  and  exclusive  work  is  their  establishment. 

III.   MAIN   DIVISIONS   OF   ARGUMENT. 

The  argument  for  Infant  Baptism  which  we  pur- 
pose to  present  in  this  treatise,  has  three  main  divi- 
sions, viz. :  (1).  Argument  from  Reason.  (2).  The 
Scriptural.     (3).  The  Historical. 


CHAPTER  II. 

I. 
ARGUMENT   FROM   REASON. 

This  argument  has  reference  to  the  inherent  nature 
and  legitimate  fruits  of  such  an  infant  baptism  as 
that  which  the  above  theory  describes.  It  takes  for 
granted  the  scriptural  authority  of  such  an  ordinance 
and  considers  the  testimony  of  reason  as  to  its  inher- 
ent character  and  legitimate  influence  as  such.  It 
thus  seeks  to  be  an  a  priori  argument  in  preparation 
for  the  scriptural.  It  consists  of  two  parts:  1.  Not 
inherently  wrong.  2.  Most  useful  in  its  legitimate 
tendencies  and  results. 

Part  Fikst. 

Sucli  an  Infant  Baptism^  as  that  Set  Forth  in  this 
Theory^  not  Inherently  Wrong. — It  is  objected  to  this 
rite  that  Christian  Baptism,  by  being  given  to  non- 
believing  children,  sometimes  including  those  sin- 
fully refusing  belief,  has  imposed  upon  it  a  greatly 
modified  meaning — one  differing  largely  from  that 
which  it  has  when  given  to  believers ;  and  such  a 
modification  is  alleged  to  be  inherentl}^  wrong — 
wrongf  in  the  sense  that  it  can  in  no  circumstances  be 
done  without  sin.  That  it  is  apparently  a  very  great 
modification  must  be  confessed.  The  rite  certainly 
does  not,  in  most  cases,  symbolize  believers.  It  is 
actually  the  case  that  Christian  Baptism,   while  a 


b  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

divinely-appointed  symbol  of  its  believinp^  subjects^ 
does,  as  given  to  non-believing  cliildren,  symbolize 
those  destitute  of  belief.  It  is  confessedly  true  that 
a  symbol  is  administered  to  them  which,  when  given 
to  believers,  designates  them  as  believers,  as  mem- 
bers of  God's  holy  Church,  as  buried  with  Christ,  as 
being  in  the  name  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  etc.  This 
objection,  now  to  be  considered,  has  a  great  deal  of 
apparent  weight,  is  very  influential  with  many  consci- 
entious Christians,  and  is  regarded  as  a  fatal  one  by 
all  rejecters  of  the  rite.  This  objection,  apparently 
so  strong  and  invincible,  must  be  removed  if  we 
would  have  the  rite  rest  upon  a  trustworthy  basis. 
If  valid  it  strikes  a  fatal  blow  at  the  very  vitals  of 
the  ordinance.  If  it  involves  anything  inherently 
wrong,  wrong  in  its  very  nature,  then  it  cannot  possi- 
bly, in  any  circumstances,  be  rightly  practised.  Let 
its  essential  sinfulness,  in  any  of  its  legitimate  re- 
quirements, be  fully  established  and  no  reasonings  in 
its  favor,  however  plausible  and  otherwise  convincing^ 
can  be  of  any  avail.  We  must,  therefore,  to  begin 
with,  carefully  and  thoroughly  consider  this  feature 
of  the  rite  which  is  so  much  objected  to  as  involving 
inherent  wrong. 

Just  here  we  wish  to  reiterate  and  emphasize  the 
fact  that  Christian  Baptism  is  a  symbol  of  the  faith 
of  its  subjects,  in  the  sense  that  no  one  destitute  of 
it  can  be  a  baptized  person.  A  non-believing  child^ 
receiving  its  form,  is  not,  accurately  speaking,  a 
baptized  child ;  though  usage  for  convenience's  sake^ 
designates  him  as  such.  Only  when,  having  become 
old  enough  to  be  capable,  he  shall  give  vitality  to 


ARGUMENT   FROM   REASON.  7 

that  lifeless  (on  his  part)  form  by  his  own  faith,  does 
it  become  to  him  a  living,  real  baptism.  It  was, 
when  first  administered,  a  living  one  on  the  part  of 
his  believing  parents,  and  their  church,  but  not  on 
his,  because  of  his  want  of  the  requisite  faith.  His 
part  of  the  baptism  has  not  been  performed. 

Baptism  is  an  act  of  two  parties  acting  mutually — 
the  baptizer  and  the  baptized — and  demands  of  each 
one  true  faith  as  essential  to  its  validity  on  his  part. 
It  follows,  therefore,  that  a  baptism  may  be  perfectly 
valid  on  the  part  of  one  and,  at  the  same  time,  wholly 
invalid  on  tbe  part  of  the  other,  because  of  the 
latter's  wan  tof  dispensable  faith.  To  illustrate :  I 
listen  to  a  voluntary  in  church,  executed  by  a  gifted 
and  a  highly  spiritual  organist,  who,  in  it,  happily 
voices,  the  true  and  acceptable  worship  of  his  heart. 
I,  on  the  other  hand,  while  greatly  enjoying  the 
music,  render,  by  means  of  it,  no  heart-worship  to 
God.  Evidently  that  which  was  designed  to  be  an 
expression  of  our  united  worship  was  real  worship 
on  his  part,  but  was  not  at  all  such  on  mine.  Again, 
I  listen  to  a  voluntary  executed  by  a  very  wicked 
organist,  yet  one  of  very  great  musical  abilities.  In 
the  sight  of  God,  it  was  not  a  worshiping  service, 
on  his  part,  but  I  enter  into  it  as  a  true  worshiper, 
and  by  it,  as  with  wings,  soar  up  towards  heaven. 
Manifestly  that  voluntary  was  a  real,  and  an  ac- 
cepted, one  on  my  part.  My  faith  made  it  such,  right 
in  the  face  of  the  vile  character  of  the  one  who 
played  it.  Just  so  with  baptism.  It  is  valid  to  either 
party  who  has  the  essential  faith,  but  to  neither  who 
has  it  not. 


8  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

1.  It  is  not  inherently  wrong  to  bind  non-believing 
cbildren  to  the  service  of  God  as  is  done  in  their 
baptism. 

The  fact  that  infant  children  are  unable  to  give, 
their  believing  consent  to  be  thus  bound,  and  the 
fact  that  older  ones  do  not  choose  to  give  such  con- 
sent, does  not  render  their  baptism  inherently  wrong, 
as  we  shall  endeavor  to  show.  In  the  case  of  the 
former  the  binding  is,  of  course,  prospective,  and  does 
not  make  the  child  responsible,  until  he  becomes  a 
moral  agent.  It  lays  hold  of  him  when  he  first  be- 
comes such  and  keeps  taking  faster  and  faster  hold 
upon  him  all  through  his  life,  increasing  in  its 
strength  of  grasp  at  a  ratio  corresponding  to  his 
growth  in  knowledge,  and  his  opportunities  for 
Christian  usefulness. 

Limitations.  Parents  can  bind  them  only  with 
those  obligations  which  God  has  already  placed  upon 
them.  They  can  impose  only  God-imposed  duties. 
The  same  is  true  respecting  their  binding  themselves, 
as  parents,  to  their  own  duties  in  the  covenant — their 
pledge  to  trust  God's  sure  word  of  promise,  faith- 
fully to  train  their  children,  etc.  They  can  rightly 
pledge  themselves  to  do  nothing  for  their  children 
which  God  has  not  commanded  them  to  do.  In  all 
this  binding  of  themselves  and  children  they  must 
act  strictly  in  the  same  line  with  God.  They,  there- 
fore, simply  make  previous  responsibilities  greater : 
add  new  bands  to  those  they  find  already  closely 
binding  their  children. 

Proof  from  Analogous  Cases.— Parents  rightly 
bind  them  to  the  service  of  men  to  a  limited  extent. 


AEGUMENT   FROM   REASON.  9 

and,  in  so  doing,  necessarily  bind  them  to  the  service 
of  God.  They  cannot,  rightly,  command  or  bind  a 
child  to  do  an  errand  without,  at  the  same  time  and 
by  the  same  act,  binding  him  to  do  it  for  God ; 
neither  can  a  child  rightly  do  any  service  to  a  man 
and  not  also,  in  the  same  act,  do  the  same  to  God, 
nor  can  he  truly  serve  God  without,  in  spirit  if  not 
in  formal  act,  serving  men.  in  the  same  acts.  The 
two  kinds  of  service  are  inseparable — mutually  essen- 
tial to  each  other,  different  phases  of  one  and  the 
same  thing,  and  for  that  reason,  it  is  not  possible  for 
a  parent  rightly  to  enjoin  upon  his  minor  son  an 
hour's  work  for  a  neighbor  wdthout  having  true  ser- 
vice to  God  involved  in,  and  essential  to,  that  same 
enjoinment.  He  cannot,  by  his  authority,  make  it 
obligatory  upon  that  son  to  do  a  favor  for  another, 
and  not,  at  the  same  time  and  by  the  same  command, 
make  it  obligatory  upon  him  to  do  the  same,  in  the 
same  act,  for  God.  Hence,  the  undisputed  right  to 
bind  children  in  service  to  men,  necessarily  involves 
the  right  to  bind  them  to  all  of  God's  requirements. 
In  sending  a  son  to  school  they  impose  upon  him 
all  the  obligations  of  a  Christian  scholar.  By  their 
godly  lives  they  greatly  increase  their  children's  ob- 
ligations to  live  the  same.  In  leading  them  to  God's 
house  of  worship  they  make  it  their  bounden  duty 
there  to  render  true  w^orship  to  God  so  far  as  they 
are  capable.  The  majority  in  the  state  through  their 
representatives,  impose  upon  the  minority,  often 
without  their  consent,  sometimes  against  their  indig- 
nant protest,  laws  which  they  are  in  duty  bound  to 
obey. 


10  IKFANT   BAPTISM. 

The  very  act  of  consecrating  a  child  to  God  neces- 
sarily binds  him  to  his  service.  Joshua  of  old  thus 
bound  his  whole  family  Avhen,  filled  with  the  Spirit 
of  God,  he  uttered  in  the  presence  of  all  the  tribes 
of  Israel,  those  ever-memorable  words  of  personal 
and  household  consecration :  As  for  me  and  my 
house  we  will  serve  the  Lord.  Those  of  his  house 
who,  cooperating  with  him,  bound  themselves  to  the 
same  service,  received  an  additional  band  in  the  one 
imposed  by  him  ;  while  those,  if  any,  refusing  thus 
to  bind  themselves  were  all  the  same  bound  by  him. 
He  did  not  need  their  consent  for  his  justification 
nor  to  make  his  binding  real. 

Ecclesiastical  councils,  in  ordaining  a  man  to  the 
gospel  ministry,  not  only  thus  recognize  him  as  al- 
ready called  and  set  apart  by  God  to  that  work, 
bound  to  it  by  God,  but  they,  themselves,  also,  set 
him  apart  and  bind  him  to  it.  They  do  this  not  only 
by  the  authority  of  the  churches  they  represent,  but, 
also,  by  their  own  as  moral  beings,  each  member  act- 
ing for  himself ;  and  the  man  ordained  will,  if  un- 
faithful, be  more  guilty  because  of  the  obligations 
imposed  upon  him  by  the  authority  of  each  and 
every  member  of  the  council. 

We  bind  the  angels  of  heaven  with  additional  ol> 
ligations  to  praise  God  every  time  we  sing  those 
lines  of  doxology  so  appropriate  for,  and  so  often 
used  in,  songs  of  divine  worship  ; 

"  Praise  Him  above  ye  heavenly  hosts, 
Praise  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost." 

An  angel  refusing  thus  to  praise  would  be  more 
guilty  because  of  those  songs  of  God's  children  upon 


ARGUMENT   FROM   REASON.  11 

earth  binding  him.  No  moral  being  can  knowingly 
be  urged  to  do  a  God-imposed  duty  by  the  humblest 
one  in  the  universe,  without  being  placed  under  addi- 
tional obligations  to  do  it  by  that  urging.  We  think 
we  may  with  unimpaired  reverence  add  that  a  pray- 
ing man,  pleading  at  the  throne  of  grace  for  the  con- 
version of  a  sinner,  binds  God  to  cause  that  conversion 
if  he  can  wisely  do  it.  It  seems  to  us  that  such  a 
prayer  increases  his  obligations  in  the  case.  We 
seem  ourselves  to  get  grander  and  more  glorious 
conceptions  of  God's  infinite  moral  greatness  and 
holiness  when  we  contemplate  him  as  acknowledging 
and  glorying  in  the  bands  thus  placed  upon  him  by 
his  praying  children. 

Enjoined  hy  Crod  Himself — That  God  enjoins  upon 
moral  beings  the  duty  of  thus  binding  each  other 
appears  from  the  fact  that  his  requirements  are  such 
that  one  cannot  possibly  meet  them  without  so  do- 
ing. He  commands  every  one  to  confer  upon  others 
all  the  good  in  his  power.  It  is  confessedly  a  great 
good  to  be  bound  to  duty  by  others — in  other  words, 
to  have  one's  obligations  to  it  increased  by  them. 
Hence  one  cannot  comply  with  the  requirement  of 
God  to  confer  all  the  good  he  possibly  can,  without 
so  binding  them.  It  cannot,  then,  be  inherently 
wrong  for  parents  to  do  this  for  their  children  as  they 
do  in  their  baptism. 

The  Fiindameyital  Pi-incvple. — The  right  to  bind  or 
pledge  others  to  the  performance  of  their  real  duties, 
with  or  without  their  consent,  is  a  fundamental  prin- 
ciple of  moral  government.  It  inheres  in  every 
moral   being.     By  virtue  of  the  fact  that  he   is   a 


12  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

moral  being,  he  has  the  inherent  right  to  bind  to 
the  faithful  doing  of  every  duty,  not  only  himself, 
but  also  every  other  moral  being.  He  is  his  bro- 
ther's keeper ;  everj^  moral  being  is  his  brother ;  he, 
therefore,  has  all  the  rights  and  powers  essential  to 
such  a  high  calling.  This,  of  course,  must  be  done 
with  wisdom  and  under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  Because  of  the  lack  of  the  necessary  wisdom 
and  a  loose,  distrustful  hold  upon  God's  promises  to 
guide,  multitudes  are  greatly  limited  in  this  impor- 
tant sphere  of  usefulness.  They  are  largely  shut  up 
to  the  binding  which  comes  from  prayer.  Christian 
living,  the  Cliristian  nurture  of  children,  etc.  In 
most  cases,  it  would  be  unwise  and,  consequently, 
wrong  to  inflict  penalties  to  secure  fidelity,  as'  they, 
at  best,  can  only  secure  that  which  is  outward  and 
formal.  Parents  may  do  this  to  a  limited  extent. 
Citizens  in  the  state  may  and  must  do  this,  either 
personally  as  government  officers  or  simply  as  private 
citizens  through  their  representatives  in  office.  But 
limited  and  indirect  as  is  their  power  to  inflict 
needed  penalties,  they  can  and  they  must,  as  faithful 
moral  beings,  use  all  the  moral  power  they  can  put 
forth  in  binding  others  to  every  one  of  their  God- 
imposed  duties. 

The  Essential  Basis  of  all  G-overning. — This  prin- 
ciple is  one  upon  which  all  rightful  governing  rests. 
Parents  could  not  with  right  govern  their  children, 
nor  civil  rulers  their  subjects,  nor  God  all  moral 
beings,  were  it  not  for  this  right,  inherent  in  them  as 
moral  beings. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  every  man  does  govern  not 


ARGUMENT   FROM   REASON.  13 

only  his  children,  but  also  his  fellow-men.  In  the 
state,  every  citizen  governs  every  one  of  his  fellow- 
citizens.  He  enacts  the  statute  laws  of  his  common- 
wealth through  the  legislators  acting  by  his  author- 
ity. He  passes  judgment  upon  those  laws,  and 
pronounces  judicial  sentences  upon  violators  of  them 
through  the  judges  acting  as  his  agents.  He  exe- 
cutes those  laws  through  the  agency  of  executive 
officers.  When  a  man  is  executed  for  the  crime  of 
wilful  murder,  every  man  in  the  state  puts  the  death 
noose  around  his  neck  and  lets  drop  the  fatal  trap 
upon  which  he  stands,  and  so  inflicts  the  dread  pen- 
alty of  the  law.  As  it  is  a  universally  accepted 
maxim,  that  what  one  does  through  another  he  him- 
self does,  it  certainly  follows  that  every  man  is,  by 
right  and  necessity,  a  law-maker,  a  judge,  and  a 
ruler,  just  as  truly  and  just  as  extensively  as  do 
those  acting  officially.  Infant  Baptism,  then,  stands 
in  these  respects  upon  the  same  immovable  rock  with 
parental,  civil,  and  the  divine  government. 

2.  Not  inherently  wrong  to  administer  the  church 
symbol  of  faith  and  of  a  believer  to  a  non-believing 
child,  as  is  done  in  his  baptism. 

Numberless  Confirmatory  Analogies. — That  it  is 
not  necessarily  wrong  to  lead  unregenerate  chil- 
dren- to  take  the  posture  and  utter  words  of  prayer 
is  universally  admitted.  The  child  himself,  if  old 
enough  to  be  a  moral  agent,  does  wrong  in  doing  so 
not  in  faith;  but  his  believing  parents  do  not.  But 
faith  on  the  part  of  those  using  forms  of  prayer  is  as 
essential  to  a  real  prayer  as  to  a  real  baptism. 

As   the  words,    posture,   etc.,   of   prayer   are   the 


14  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

expressions  of  the  real  prayer  of  faith,  they  are  sym- 
bols of  faith ;  hence  the  parents,  in  leading  him  to 
use  these  forms,  administer  to  him  symbols  of  faith, 
substantially  the  same  thing  which  they  do  in  giving 
him  the  rite  of  baptism. 

It  is  not  necessarily  wrong  in  parents  to  lead  their 
non-believing  children,  even  grossly  wicked  ones,  to 
the  house  set  tipart  exclusively  for  the  sincere  and 
holy  worship  of  God ;  although  all  entering  it  are, 
if  old  enough,  required  to  do  so  as  believing  wor- 
shipers, and  greatly  sin  if  they  do  not.  It  is  not 
thus  wrong  to  invite  unbelieving  persons  to  sit  in 
the  church  choir  and  lead  the  congregation  in  the 
holy  service  of  sacred  song,  much  as  God  demands, 
with  fearful  penalties,  the  true  spirit  of  holy  worship 
in  all  participating  in  it. 

Nothing,  then,  can  be  more  certain  than  that  God 
requires  parents  to  induce  their  children  to  do  things 
which  he  allows  them  to  do  only  in  faith,  when  they 
at  the  same  time  have  no  reason  to  believe  that  they 
in  doing  them  will  comply  with  that  condition,  so 
absolutely  essential  to  all  permissible  acts.  For 
their  justification,  they  must  fall  back  upon  this 
fundamental  principle  in  moral  government  just  con- 
sidered, viz.: 

The  right  to  persuade  with  binding  authority  and 
in  some  cases  to  compel  others  to  do  their  duty, 
even  when  they  know  that  they  will  do  it  not  in 
faith,  and  so  not  acceptably  to  God,  belongs  to  every 
moral  being. 

Thus  to  impose  moral  obligations  is  his  high  and 
responsible  calling.     He  is   not  to  blame  for  their 


ARGUMENT  FROM   REASON".  15 

failure  in  duty  in  the  case.  The  certainty  that  they 
will  not  discharge  the  obligations  as  God  requires, 
does  not  necessarily  make  it  wrong  for  him  to 
impose  them.  He  and  his  fellow-men  are  put  by 
God  in  partnership  as  his  servants,  and  he  must  per- 
form his  part,  whether  his  partners  do  theirs  or  not. 
In  attempting  to  disregard  this  principle  and  act 
upon  its  opposite,  men  must  run  into  gross  absurdi- 
ties. They  who  maintain  the  inherent  wrongfulness 
of  giving  the  baptismal  symbol  to  non-believing  chil- 
dren, cannot  in  consistency  lead  them  to  repeat  the 
Lord's  prayer,  take  the  posture  of  prayer,  nor  go 
with  them  to  God's  house  of  worship.  They  cannot 
pray  with  unconverted  men,  as  that  involves  the 
effort  to  lead  them  in  prayer.  Roger  Williams  saw 
this.  "  He  maintained  that  it  was  wrong  to  pray 
with  an  unregenerate  man,  even  though  he  be  a  wife 
or  child,  and  for  that  reason  would  neither  pray  in 
his  family  nor  give  thanks  at  meals  with  his  wife 
and  children,"  so  Hubbard  says,  "  because  some  were 
unregenerate  and  others  would  fellowship  Avith 
churches  which  he  denounced."^  But  with  all  his 
conscientious  painstaking,  he  could  carry  out  his 
principles  only  to  a  very  limited  extent.  To  do  so 
in  all  things  he  must  needs  go  out  of  this  sinful 
world.  We  are  not  sure  that  perfect  consistency 
would  permit  him  to  remain  in  heaven,  where,  if  we 
mistake  not,  the  redeemed  as  ministering  spirits 
have  much  to  do  with  inducing  parents  upon  earth 
to  teach  their  unbelieving  children  to  pray,  and  in 

1  Congregational  Quarterly,  July,    1878;   also  Mass.  Historical  Col., 
chap.  2. 


16  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

urging  believers  to  pray  in  the  presence  of  unbeliev- 
ing men  as  opportunity  is  given  them  and  wisdom 
directs.  We  feel  sure  that  they  look  upon  all  such 
nurture  by  parents  with  approbation  and  delight. 
This,  of  course,  would  shut  them  out  from  the  fel- 
lowship of  good  Roger  Williams,  provided  he 
remained  of  the  same  mind  as  when  upon  earth. 
We  say  this  with  a  great  deal  of  respect  for  his 
sincerity  and  piety.  It  was  his  head,  not  his  heart, 
which  was  at  fault. 

To  Proceed  with  Analogies, — It  is,  confessedly,  not 
wrong  to  unite  unbelieving  ones  in  the  holy  bonds 
of  marriage.  But  God  requires  all  entering  that 
sacred  relation  to  do  so  as  believers,  for  the  reason 
that,  as  a  holy  God,  he  does  and  must  require  this 
same  qualification  of  all  moral  beings  in  all  they  do. 
Hence  the  wedding  ring  put  upon  the  finger  of  the 
bride  is  a  symbol  of  faith,  and  as  such  is  adminis- 
tered by  the  officiating  clergyman.  If  this  is  not 
inherently  wrong  in  marriage,  it  cannot  be  so  in 
baptism.  In  this  ceremony  the  parties  are  bound  to 
the  believing  performance  of  all  the  duties  of  hus- 
band and  wife,  just  as  the  unbelieving  subjects  of 
parental  baptism  are  in  respect  to  all  the  duties  of 
believers. 

The  apparent,  not  real,  incongruity  of  uniting  in 
marriao-e  believino-  with  unbelievino^  ones  has  trou- 
bled  some  thoughtful,  godly  ministers.  Rev.  Dr. 
Mckeen,  for  forty  years  the  honored  pastor  of  the 
Congregational  church  in  Bradford,  Vt.,  positively 
refused  in  his  early  ministry  to  solemnize  the  mar- 
riage of  a  professing  Christian   and    one  who   was 


ARGUMENT   FROM   REASON.  17 

not.  Consistency  required  him  to  refuse  when  both 
parties  were  not.  If  wrong  to  induct  an  unbelieving 
one  into  such  a  holy  relation  with  a  believing  one, 
much  more  must  it  be  to  induct  two  such  into  that 
which,  in  its  origin  and  highest  use,  involves  a 
union  with  Christ.  Had  he  known  what  this  mean- 
eth — this  fundamental  principle  underlying  all  moral 
government  just  mentioned — he  would  not  thus  have 
condemned  a  guiltless  practice  on  the  part  of  the 
officiating  minister.  It  should  here  be  stated,  in 
justice  to  that  saintly  man,  that,  in  the  later  years 
of  his  ministry,  he  retreated  from  this  extreme  posi- 
tion to  the  wiser  one  now  generally,  if  not  univer- 
sally, accepted. 1 

The  Two  Coordinate  Principles. — In  dismissing  this 
point  which  we  have  been  considering,  we  ask  the 
reader  to  mark  well  the  fact  that  we,  in  confirmation 
of  the  seventh  and  eighth  points  in  the  theory  set 
forth  at  the  commencement  of  this  treatise,  insist 
just  as  strenuously  as  anyone  does  or  can,  that  bap- 
tism is  a  symbol  of  its  subject's  faith,  and  that  his 
faith  is  absolutely  essential  to  its  validity  on  his 
part ;  also,  that  we,  in  the  same  confirmation,  insist 
just  as  strenuously  upon  the  coordinate  and  equally 
evident  truth,  that  symbols  of  faith  may  and  should, 
in  certain  circumstances  and  for  probationary  pur- 
poses, be  given  to  those  destitute  of  faith.  We  have 
found,  as  we  think,  that  these  two  twin  truths  are 
fundamental,  not  only  to  infant  baptism,  but  also  to 
nearly  all  other  transactions  in  a  moral  system. 

In  saying  this  we  are  not  unmindful  of  the  grand 

1  Congregational  Quarterly,  July,  1878,  p.  391. 
3 


18  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

principle  much  insisted  upon  by  all  true  Protes- 
tants, viz. :  Every  symbol  derives  its  usefulness  and 
the  justification  of  its  use  from  the  truths  it  repre- 
sents, and  so  must  never  be  seriously  used  where 
those  truths  are  wanting.  We  confess  the  validity 
and  great  importance  of  that  principle,  but  at  the 
same  time  deny  any  conflict  between  it  and  giving 
the  baptism-symbol  of  faith  to  a  non-believing  child. 
Christian  baptism,  as  we  have  seen,  consists  of  two 
parts,  the  act  of  two  parties — those  administering 
and  those  receiving  it.  In  infant  baptism  only  one 
party  acts,  the  believing  ones  administering  it.  On 
their  part  the  truths  symbolized  do  actually  exist, 
and  hence  there  is  no  violation  of  the  principle. 
That  it  does  not  forbid  tiie  use  of  a  symbol  in  all 
cases  where  some  parts  of  its  truths  are  wanting 
on  the  part  of  one  party  in  its  use,  is  evident  from 
what  we  have  repeatedly,  and  with  much  emphasis, 
shown  in  the  case  of  teaching  children  to  pray,  sing, 
etc. 

3.  Not  inherently  wrong  to  administer  the  divinely- 
appointed  symbol  of  a  church-member  to  non- 
believing  children. 

In  the  baptism  of  a  non-believing  child,  a  symbol 
of  a  church-member  is  given  one  who,  because  of 
his  want  of  faith,  is  not,  and  cannot  be,  a  real  church- 
member.  By  this  means  all  the  duties  and  responsi- 
bilities are  prospectively  imposed  upon  him.  The 
same  reasons  prove  this  not  inherently  wrong  which 
were  used  to  prove  the  same  in  the  two  other  respects 
(1  and  2)  just  considered  at  length,  viz.:  Not  inher- 
ently wrong  to  impose,  as  God's  agents,  what  he  has 


ARGUMENT   FROM   REASON.  19 

already  imposed,  as  what  is  thus  wrong  can  no  more 
be  done  by  God  than  man.  No  more  wrong  than  to 
induce  him  to  utter  words  of  prayer  and  praise.  Not 
wrong  to  impose  them  prospectively,  before  he 
becomes  a  moral  agent  for  the  reason  that  they  do 
not  become  really  imposed  upon  him  until  he  becomes 
one.  By  every  one  of  their  prayers  for  his  early 
conversion  and  by  all  they  do  in  preparation  for  his 
Christian  nurture,  they  prospectively  impose  obliga- 
tions which  will  keep  hold  of  him,  with  ever-increas- 
ing grasp,  in  all  the  ages  of  eternity. 

4.  For  like  reasons  it  cannot  be  inherently  wrong 
to  administer  to  non-believing  children  the  holy  bap- 
tismal seal  of  that  sacred  covenant  made  by  God 
with  believing,  faithful  parents  and  their  church 
respecting  their  children. 

5.  Not  thus  wrong  to  baptize  him  into  the  holy 
name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit. 

Whatever  may  be  the  specific  meaning  of  being  in 
the  name  of  the  Triune  God,  it  cannot  be  a  union 
any  more  intimate  and  sacred  than  that  which  a 
believer  experiences  when  praying;  and  they  both 
must  be  substantially  one  and  the  same.  All  speci- 
fic unions  with  God  are,  and  must  be,  identical — dif- 
ferent forms  of  one  common  substance. 

A  believer's  prayer  shows  him  a  real  and  an 
accepted  worshiper  of  the  Father,  and,  as  such,  in  a 
most  intimate  union  with  him ;  it  also  shows  him  in 
the  most  intimate  holy  union  with  the  divine  Son, 
through  whom  he  prays ;  also,  under  the  guidance  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  making  his  abode  in  him,  pervading 
him  as  the  soul  pervades  the  body,  and  inditing  his 


20  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

petitions.  What,  then,  is  this  union  in  prayer  but 
being  in  the  most  holy  and  the  closest  union  possi- 
ble with  God?  What  can  it  be  but  being  in  the 
name  of  the  Holy  Trinity  ? 

But  the  outward  form  of  prayer  (its  words,  pos- 
ture, etc.)  is  a  symbol  of  true  prayer;  and  as  prayer 
puts  one  into  the  name  of  the  Trinity,  it  follows  that 
its  form  symbolizes  the  being  in  that  holy  name,  just 
as  truly  as  does  the  outward  form  of  baptism.  Now, 
as  it  is  confessedly  right  to  give  non-believing  chil- 
dren the  prayer-symbol  of  being  in  that  name,  it  can- 
not be  inherently  wrong  to  do  essentially  the  same 
thing,  in  giving  them  its  baptism-symbol.  For  a 
further  treatment  of  this  point,  see  Appendix  A. 

6.  Not  thus  wrong  to  forestall  the  choice  of  the 
child  as  to  the  time  and  mode  of  his  baptism,  so  far 
as  his  baptism  does  this. 

If,  when  converted,  he  is  not  satisfied  with  his  pre- 
vious parental  baptism,  and  feels  it  his  duty  to 
receive  another,  Infant  Baptism,  as  we  understand 
it,  gives  him  the  liberty.  That  re-baptisms  are  not 
necessarily  wrong,  but  sometimes  right  and  expe- 
dient, is  shown  b}^  the  fact  that  Christ  and  his  apos- 
tles were,  according  to  the  theory  of  Infant  Baptism, 
re-baptized ;  first  in  their  circumcision,  and  again  in 
their  Christian  baptism.  If  circumcision  and  bap- 
tism are  one  and  the  same  in  different  forms — a  sup- 
position witli  which  Infant  Baptism  stands  or  falls — 
they  were  certainly  re-baptized.  If  so,  such  cannot 
be  essentially  wrong  nor  never  allowable. 

7.  The  washing  of  his  disciples'  feet  by  Christ,  at 
his  last  paschal  supper,  strikingly  confirms  the  not- 
inherent  wronoffulness  of  the  rite. 


ARGUMENT  FROM  REASON.  .21 

It  was  not  the  prescribed  Jewish  ritual  washing  at 
their  meals,  as  that  took  place  before  eating ;  while 
this  was  during  supper  (John  13:  2.  Rev.  Ver.). 
In  the  former  special  prominence  was  given  to  wash- 
inof  their  hands  ;  in  the  latter  the  feet  alone  were 
washed.  It  evidently  was  an  unusual,  if  not  an 
unprecedented,  procedure  called  forth  by  the  disgust- 
ing strife  of  his  disciples  for  preferment.  His  object 
was  to  give  them  an  object  lesson  of  true  greatness 
in  humble  service.  He  washed  their  feet  rather  than 
hands,  as  the  former  was  more  the  service  of  a  menial 
that  the  latter,  and  hence  a  better  object  lesson  in 
the  case.  He  did  not  also  wash  their  hands  as  that 
would  have  added  nothing  to  the  desired  effect. 
Another  object  of  his  was  to  symbolize  their  spiritual 
cleanliness  because  washed  in  his  own  blood.  His 
washing  their  feet,  he  made  a  picture  of  that  wash- 
ing of  regeneration  which  they  had  received.  For 
he  says  to  Peter,  with  great  emphasis  of  expression : 
*'  If  I  wash  thee  not  "  (do  not  give  you  that  cleans- 
ing which  this  my  Avashing  symbolizes)  "  thou  hast 
no  part  with  me."  Now  every  one  thus  cleansed  is 
wliolly  cleansed,  made  clean  in  all  his  parts,  if  we 
may  look  upon  the  spiritual  man  as  made  up  of 
parts.  One  part  made  clean  is  certain  evidence  that 
all  the  others  have  been.  Hence  it  was  not  neces- 
sary to  wash  symbolically  more  than  one  member  of 
Peter's  body.  That  of  his  feet,  or  that  of  a  single 
finger,  would  picture  his  entire  cleansing  just  as  truly 
and  far  more  impressively  than  that  of  his  whole 
person ;  or  even  that  of  two  or  more  members  of  it. 

Christ  really  said  to  Peter :  You  have  been  washed 


22  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

and  made  clean  in  my  blood.  To  symbolize  this  it  is 
needful  only  to  wash  your  feet.  As  they  are  washed 
in  this  water,  so  your  whole  soul  has  been  washed. 
The  symbol  thus  pictures  you  "  clean  every  whit." 
For  a  like  reason,  a  little  baptismal  water  sprinkled 
or  poured  upon  the  head  of  a  believer,  symbolizes 
his  entire  cleansing,  just  as  truly,  and,  in  many 
respects,  far  more  impressively  as  it  seems  to  us, 
than  does  the  entire  immersion  of  his  body. 

This  his  washing,  then,  symbolized  exactly  the 
same  thing  with  Christian  baptism — spiritual  cleans- 
ing in  the  blood  of  Christ.  This  fact  thus  established, 
leads  us  to  consider  next  that  act  of  Christ  which 
bears  most  decisively  upon  the  question  before  us, 
viz.:  He  washed  the  feet  of  Judas — not  only  those 
of  his  eleven  genuine  disciples,  but,  also,  those  of 
the  apostate  one.  No  mention  is  made  of  his  pass- 
ing by  him  as  there  most  certainly  would  be  if  he 
had.  He  thus  did  essentially  just  what  parents  do 
in  giving  the  baptismal  symbol  to  a  grossly  wicked 
child.  The  same  difficulties,  the  same  objections 
against,  and  the  same  reasons  for,  hold  in  the  one 
case  as  in  the  other.  That  sacred  symbol  (washing 
his  feet)  was  modified  in  its  meaning  by  the  charac- 
ter of  the  one  to  whom  it  was  given,  as  all  symbols 
must  be  more  or  less.  Christ  did  his  part ;  Judas 
did  not  do  his.  It  symbolized  his  crying  need  of 
that  spiritual  cleansing  ;  it  bound  him  anew  to  God's 
service  ;  it  imposed  fearful  obligations  ;  it  is  His  last 
opportunity  for  •  pressing  invitation  and  agonizing 
entreaty.  His  loving  Saviour  is  still  striving  to 
reclaim  him ;    to  save  him  from  his  dreadful  doom 


ARGUMENT   FROM   REASON.  23 

right  before  him.  Oh,  how  loath  to  give  him  up ! 
A  reiteration  of  the  heart-rending  lamentation  of 
Hosea:  "How  shall  I  give  thee  up,  Ephraim?  How 
shall  I  deliver  thee,  Israel  ?  How  shall  I  make  thee 
as  Admah?  How  shall  I  set  thee  up  as  Zeboim? 
Mine  heart  is  turned  within  me,  my  repentings  are 
kindled  together." 

It  was  meet  that  he  should,  even  at  that  eleventh 
hour,  throw  wide  open  the  nearly  closed  door  for  his 
return,  by  giving  him  the  same  symbol  as  to  the 
other  true  disciples.  It  was  most  good-shepherd- 
like that  his  heart  full  of  compassion  and  his  hand 
so  ready  to  the  rescue,  should  unite  in  this  his  last 
possible  and  greatest  effort  for  this  his  lost  sheep. 
Was  he  not  his  own  child,  even  one  numbered  with 
his  apostolic  children  ?  Had  he  not  come  up  under 
his  own  loving  nurture  ?  Will  there  not  be  a  man- 
sion in  his  father's  house  all  prepared  for  him  if  he 
only  would,  in  this  his  last  probationary  opportun- 
ity, turn  to  him  and  live  ?  Who  can  tell  the  unut- 
terable anguish  of  his  heart  when,  in  its  despair,  he 
was  forced  to  exclaim  :  "  And  ye  are  clean,  but  not 
all."  As  Christ  rightly  gave  him  a  symbol  of  the 
washing  of  regeneration,  it  cannot  be  inherently 
wrong  to  give  the  baptismal  symbol  of  the  same  to 
non-believing  children. 


CHAPTER   III. 

Part  Second. 

Such  an  Infant  Baptism  as  that  Set  Forth  in  this 
Theory^  G-reatly  Useful  in  Its  Legiti^nate  Ten- 
dencies and  Results. 

G-reatly  Useful  to  the  Children  Baptized. — Having 
proved  the  rite  not  inherently  wrong,  we  have 
removed  a  much-used  and  a  very  influential  objection 
which,  were  it  a  valid  one,  would  render  all  further 
efforts  to  establish  it  entirely  useless.  We,  there- 
fore, are  now  at  liberty  to  consider  the  question  of 
its  usefulness,  the  certainty  of  which  will  make  it 
clearly  a  demand  of  reason.  Reason  demands  every- 
thing which  is  both  not  inherently  wrong  and,  also, 
useful. 

In  this  part  we  shall  endeavor  to  show  that  it  is 
greatly  useful  to  all  the  parties,  parents,  church,  and 
children,  by  showing  it  so  to  the  children.  All  that 
proves  this  will,  also,  be  proof  of  its  usefulness  to  the 
parents  and  the  church.  They,  under  God,  are  the 
givers,  the  children  the  receivers.  As  it  is  more 
blessed  to  give  than  to  receive,  so  what  is  useful  to 
the  children  receiving,  must  be  the  same  to  the 
others  giving.  We  shall  not,  therefore,  consider 
directly  and  separately  its  usefulness  to  the  parents 
and  church,  but  we  shall  do  so  indirectly  and  no  less 
effectively,  in  showing  its  very  great  usefulness  to 
the  children. 


ARGUMENT   FROM   REASON.  25 

Infant  Baptism,  as  a  symbol,  makes  use,  and  greatly 
augments  the  power,  of  such  effective  instrumentali- 
ties, as  parental  consecration,  prayer,  and  all  other 
ones  made  use  of  in  the  Christian  nurture  of  chil- 
dren. It  must  then,  when  rightly  improved,  secure 
the  blessing  of  God  upon  them  in  large  measure. 
An  examination  of  the  rite  will  show  it  happily  fitted, 
savingly  to  affect  their  minds  and  hearts. 

1.  Greatly  useful  because  it  binds  them  so 
solemnly  to  the  service  of  God. 

Parents,  in  consecrating  their  children  to  God  in 
their  baptism,  bind  them  to  his  lifelong  service,  and 
the  rite,  as  a  divinely-appointed  sign,  helps  them  so 
to  bind  them.  It  is  a  great  blessing  to  a  child  to  be 
so  bound.  No  child  can  look  upon  himself  as  thus 
consecrated  to  God  and  not  feel  that  his  guilt  will  be 
greatly  augmented  if  he  refuses  to  consecrate  himself 
in  like  manner.  No  child  can  contemplate  himself 
as  publicly  and  solemnly  bound  to  the  service  of 
God  by  his  loving  parents  and  their  church,  without 
feeling  himself  held  by  chains  as  irrefragable  as 
heaven's  throne  is  immovable.  This  is  a  terrible 
truth  to  a  child  who  is  at  enmity  with  his  God.  To 
resist  such  chains  is  to  fight  against  the  Almighty. 
It  is  to  be  guilty  of  despising  such  holy  bands 
imposed  by  a  father  and  mother's  hands  acting  as 
God's  servants  and  at  his  commands  ;  of  hardening 
his  heart  against  parental  love  and  fidelity;  of 
smothering  the  tenderest  and  sweetest  emotions  of 
his  nature.  Vain  and  foolish  all  such  efforts  to 
break  such  chains,  to  cast  away  such  cords  from  him. 
The  more  he  tries  to  free  himself,  the  more  firmly  he 


26  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

is  held — escape  as  impossible  as  from  the  grasp  of 
omnipotence.  To  him  resisting  they  are  indeed 
heavy  and  galling,  yet  none  the  less  sure  and  relent- 
less ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  they  are  light,  easy, 
and  precious  to  the  believing  child.  He  glories  in 
them;  he  kisses  them  in  gratitude  to  God  for  the 
unspeakable  blessing.  To  his  believing,  loving 
spirit,  they  are  easy  like  the  yoke  of  Christ,  light  as 
his  burden,  tender  as  the  caress  of  love.  To  his 
mind  they  possess  an  indescribable  charm  in  the  fact 
that  they  have  been  made  fast  upon  him  by  his  affec- 
tionate parents.  It  was  this  charm,  perhaps,  which 
first  turned  his  attention  to  the  solemn  obligations 
imposed,  made  them  subjects  of  meditation  and,  so, 
an  important  instrument  in  his  conversion.  It  is  this 
same  charm  which  causes  him  to  prize  them  more 
and  more  and  brings  him  more  and  more  every  day 
under  their  sanctifying  power ;  and  will  do  so  all 
through  his  life. 

2.  Greatly  useful  because  of  the  solemn  pledges 
of  the  parents  for  the  faithful  nurture  of  their  chil- 
dren, and  their  full  assurance  in  the  covenant 
promises  of  God  secured  for  them. 

Parents,  in  baptizing  their  children,  solemnly 
pledge  themselves  to  bring  them  up  in  the  nurture 
and  admonition  of  the  Lord,  by  precept,  by  example, 
and  by  wise  correction.  They,  by  so  doing,  also  pro- 
fess to  have  large  assurance  in  the  rich  promises  of 
God  respecting  them.  Their  baptism  as  a  symbol, 
helps  them  to  keep  these  pledges  and  to  continue 
and  grow  in  these  blessed  assurances.  This,  also,  is 
a  great  blessing  to  their  children.     No  child  can  con- 


ARGUMENT   FROM  REASON.  27 

template  himself  as  one  whose  parents  have  pledged 
themselves  to  train  him  up  for  God:  for  whose  con- 
version and  lifelong  devotion  to  his  service,  they 
took,  and  have  ever  since  been  keeping,  such  fast 
hold  of  covenant  promises ;  and  were,  and  have  ever 
since  been,  so  confident  of  their  fulfilment,  that  they 
placed  the  divinely-appointed  symbol  of  a  believer 
and  church-member  upon  him,  while  yet  an  infant, 
in  glad  anticipation  of  it.  No  child  can  contemplate 
himself  in  such  a  light  and  not  be  greatly  moved. 

The  consciousness  of  being  the  object  of  such  solemn 
pledges — pledges  involving  such  self-den^dng  labors 
and  watchful  care ;  the  object  of  such  an  holy  conse- 
cration, such  wrestling  prayers,  such  full  assurance 
of  faith  respecting  himself,  such  glad  anticipations ; 
the  consciousness  of  having  had  all  things  prepared 
by  parental  forethought  for  his  new  birth — even  the 
holy  symbol  of  baptism  to  designate  him  as  a  be- 
liever and  as  a  member  of  Christ's  church,  when  he 
shall  become  one — such  a  consciousness  as  a  power 
acting  upon  him  is  great  beyond  description.  Dread- 
ful the  thought  of  resisting  such  great  and  hallowed 
influences  and  being  lost  in  spite  of  them  all,  as, 
alas,  is  possible.  The  most  favored  child,  in  all  these 
respects,  may,  if  he  will,  walk  the  downward  road  to 
death,  right  in  the  face  of  all  these  powerful  and 
touching  influences.  As  a  free  agent  he  has,  and 
must  have,  the  power  to  cast  himself  fatally  down 
from  the  highest  pinnacle  of  privilege  and  responsi- 
bility. The  very  thought  of  this  danger,  so  dread- 
ful, will  arrest  him  in  his  mad  career  of  sin  and  turn 
him  back  in  penitence  and  faith,  if  anything  will. 


28  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

It  is  in  perfect  keeping  with  that  affecting  picture  of 
the  prodigal  son,  so  happily  delineated  by  the  blessed 
Saviour,  to  suppose  his  praying,  believing  father  con- 
fident all  the  while  of  his  wicked  son's  return,  and, 
in  the  fulness  of  his  faith,  keeping  the  fatted  calf 
and  the  best  robes  always  in  readiness  for  him.  How 
significant  that  he  saw  him  when  a  great  way  off  I 
Was  he  not  looking  for  him  with  that  triumphant 
assurance  which  God  often  gives  his  children  of 
large  faith  when  about  to  answer  their  persistent 
wrestling  prayers  ?  Was  it  not  in  answer  to  such 
prayers  and  out  of  regard  for  such  faith,  that  the 
gracious  influences  of  God's  spirit  followed  him 
all  along  his  mad  career  of  sin  and  death  and,  at 
length,  brought  him  back  to  his  home  in  penitence 
and  love  ?  The  poor  prodigal,  in  his  state  of  starva- 
tion, was  greatly  moved  to  return  by  the  thought 
that  there  was  bread  enough  and  to  spare,  in  his  so- 
much-wronged  father's  house  for  all,  not  excepting 
the  hired  servants.  How  much  more  would  he  have 
been  moved  and  constrained  had  he  really  known 
the  unwavering  faith  and  the  full  assurance  of  his 
grieving  yet  forgiving  father !  What  would  have 
been  his  emotions  could  he,  in  the  depths  of  his 
shame  and  misery,  have  seen  the  fatted  calf  and  the 
best  robe  set  apart  and  kept  in  readiness  for  his 
coming  back  to  the  home  so  wickedly  forsaken  ? 
For  a  like  reason  no  child  can  see  his  baptism  in  its 
true  light  without  being  greatly  moved. 

3.  Greatly  useful  because  of  the  intensity  of  this 
moral  pressure  which  their  parental  baptism  brings 
to  bear  upon  them  all  through  their  lives. 


ARGUMENT   FROM   REASON.  29 

This  tremendous  pressure  which  Infant  Baptism, 
when  correctly  understood  and  fully  appreciated, 
brings  to  bear  upon  a  man  can  no  more  be  described 
than  a  sunbeam  painted ;  its  measure  no  more  com- 
puted than  the  force  of  gravitation  in  the  universe. 
It  can  be  but  little  known  excepting  by  those  who 
have  felt  it;  those  whose  eyes  have  been  opened  by 
a  rich,  precious  experience  to  see  something  of  the 
magnitude  of  its  touching,  solemn  claims ;  whose 
hearts  are  filled  with  that  loyal  reverence  of  parents 
and  that  supreme  regard  for  duty  which  the  word  of 
God  enjoins.  To  an  unconverted  man  waking  up  to 
a  consciousness  of  these  obligations,  this  pressure, 
gaining  more  and  more  of  force  from  his  resistance, 
becomes  an  agony — often  the  agony  of  the  new  birth. 
To  a  true  Christian  it  is  a  constant  and  an  ever- 
increased  inspiration,  as  the  experience  of  untold 
numbers  does  testify.  The  thought  that  he  was 
bound,  when  an  infant  child,  to  a  lifelong  service  to 
his  God,  thrills  his  soul.  It  stirs  him  up  to  run  still 
more  swiftly  the  race  set  before  him.  It  comforts 
him  in  his  tribulations,  and  makes  him  glory  in  all 
the  hardships  of  his  master's  service.  It  sweetens 
his  sorrows  and  intensifies  his  joys.  It  strengthens 
his  faith  and  fires  his  zeal. 

4.  This,  its  great  usefulness,  is  not  disproved  by 
the  imperfections  of  the  results  of  the  rite  in  its 
practical  workings. 

The  results  of  all  efforts  and  instrumentalities  to 
save  and.  perfect  men  are  sadly  disappointing.  When 
we  consider  the  power  of  truth  to  affect  men  and  the 
power  of  Christ  in  wielding  it,  we  should  expect,  if 


30  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

not  knowing  to  the  contrary,  that  the  Jews  to  whom 
he  ministered  did  all  experience  the  saving  power  of 
his  ministry  among  them,  but,  alas,  how  very,  very 
small  the  number  that  did  this.  So  of  Infant  Bap- 
tism, when  we  consider  its  power,  as  rightly  used,  to 
lead  children  to  Christ  when  quite  young,  and  build 
them  up  into  consistent,  active  Christians,  we  are 
sorely  disappointed  to  find  that  in  practice,  it  does 
this  only  to  a  limited  extent.  With  many,  not  until 
they  reach  the  age  of  advanced  youth  or  manhood  ; 
sometimes  not  until  the  evening  of  a  long  life.  With 
many  it  does  not  prevent  their  dying  in  their  sins. 
With  some  it  does  not  restrain   them  from  falling- 

o 

into  gross  iniquities,  and  sinking  down  into  the  low- 
est depths  of  degradation. 

Such  universal  imperfection,  and  such  extreme 
cases  of  failure — the  latter  comparatively  few  in 
number  and  strikingly  exceptional — seem  surpassing 
strange  to  us  in  case  we  confine  our  view  to  the 
nature  and  legitimate  tendencies  of  the  rite.  But 
when  w^e  turn  our  eyes  to  the  other  side  and  look  at 
the  adverse  circumstances — the  nature  of  its  subjects 
and  the  shortcomings  of  the  parents  in  making  use 
of  the  rite,  the  strangeness  largely  disappears.  It  is, 
indeed,  very  strange  in  the  sense  that  all  sin  is 
strange ;  but  it  is  not  so  much  so,  in  the  light  of  the 
fact  that  the  character  and  circumstances  of  men  ren- 
der the  results  of  all  efforts  for  their  moral  elevation 
equally  disappointing.  In  passing  judgment  upon 
such  results  we  should  carefully  consider  and  give 
due  weight  to  the  many  and  great  obstacles  confront- 
ing parents  in  the  nurture  of  their  children,  some  of 
which  are  the  followdnof : 


ARGIJMENT   FROM   REASON.  31 

1.  Obstacles  arising  from  the  nature  and  circum- 
stances of  children. 

In  view  of  the  fiery  passions  and  vehement  im- 
pulses bound  up  in  every  child,  in  view  of  the  fertile 
germs  of  all  the  vices,  as  well  as  virtues,  of  free  moral 
beings,  planted  in  his  nature — the  latter  dependent 
for  their  growth  and  fruitage  largely  upon  the  care- 
ful cultivation  of  parents  and  others,  the  former  grow- 
ing spontaneously  like  noxious  weeds,  to  be  trans- 
formed from  fruitful  sources  of  evil  to  those  of  good 
by  repression,  budding  and  grafting ;  in  view  of  all 
his  perilous  exposures  to  temptation  and  fatal  ship- 
wreck, in  his  unavoidable  contact,  more  or  less,  with 
the  wicked  in  the  world,  the  subtle  efforts  of  Satan  to 
lead  astray  and  destroy  him;  more  than  all,  in  view 
of  the  imperfection  of  the  faith  and  nurture  of  even 
the  most  faithful  parents  and  church — in  view  of  all 
these  and  countless  other  great  obstacles,  we  cannot 
be  surprised  at  the  imperfect  results  of  the  rite  as 
actually  witnessed.  We  cannot  be  surprised  that 
even  those  baptized  children  who  have  been  most 
favored  in  their  parental  nurture,  sometimes  walk 
the  downward  road  and  become  greatly  wicked.  The 
wonder  rather  is  that  such  cases  are  so  few  and  ex- 
ceptional— far  more  so  than  many  suppose. 

Because  of  such  hindrances  to  the  successful  train- 
ing of  children  for  God,  parents  have  a  most  difficult 
task  before  them  ;  one  of  the  most  intricate  and  per- 
plexing problems  to  solve  known  to  human  experi- 
ence, one  wringing  from  their  grieving  hearts,  oh, 
how  often,  the  wail  of  anguish.  Who  is  sufficient 
for  these  things  ?     They  must  reprove,  correct,  com- 


32  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

mand  and  persuade,  neither  too  much  nor  too  little. 
They  must  choose  the  golden  mean,  the  midway 
course  between  hurtful  excess  and  equally  hurtful 
deficiency.  They  must  search  unceasingly  and  pray- 
erfully for  that  hidden,  trackless  path,  which  how- 
ever earnestly  sought,  is  never  by  mortals  fully 
found ;  however  nearly  approached,  is  never  exactly 
reached.  As  children  grow  up,  early  methods  must  be 
largely  exchanged  for  others  better  adapted  to  their 
more  mature  state  of  development  and  altered  circum- 
stances. Their  parents  must  soon  see  them  leave 
their  homes  of  sweet  and  life-nurturing  atmosphere, 
and  enter  upon  lives  largely  separate  from,  and  inde- 
pendent of,  themselves  ;  and,  so,  find  themselves,  to 
a  great  degree,  shut  up  to  the  throne  of  grace  for 
their  power  to  influence  them  while  they  are  making 
their  perilous  voyage  upon  the  tempestuous  ocean  of 
life,  beset,  all  the  way,  with  hidden  reefs  and  soul- 
wTccking  breakers. 

The  conflict  of  parents  with  Satan  for  the  posses- 
sion of  their  child  is  indeed  a  severe  one,  sometimes 
stretching  from  his  cradle  to  his  grave,  taxing  their 
faith  and  perseverence  to  the  utmost.  It  is  some- 
times a  conflict  in  which  hopes  and  fears  alternate 
with  painful  frequency  all  through  life — the  result 
trembling  in  the  balance  until  their  children,  grown 
old,  lie  upon  their  dying  beds.  Faithful  parents, 
keeping  fast  hold  of  covenant  promises,  do  not  de- 
spair even  when  they  see  their  still  precious  son  far 
gone  in  the  ways  of  sin  and  death.  They  still  hope 
though  against  hope.  If  the  shocking  tidings  come 
to  them  of  his  death  in  a  den  of  infamy  and  shame, 


ARGUMENT   FROM  REASON.  33 

his  lips  cursing  his  God  on  the  very  day  of  his  death, 
they  still  cling  to  the  covenant  promises  made  to 
them  and  dare  trust  that  in  his  last  dying  moments, 
his  thoughts  turned  away  to  his  loving  parents,  still 
pleading  for  him  in  the  full  assurance  of  hope, 
and  that  his  heart,  in  penitence,  then  cried  out  for, 
and  received,  mercy,  in  fulfilment  of  God's  gracious 
pledges.  Those  having  such  a  faith  respecting  such 
a  son,  can  peacefully  fall  asleep  in  Jesus,  leaving  him 
in  the  hands  of  that  God  to  whom  they  gave  him  in 
his  baptism ;  whom  they  have  striven  to  train  up  for 
God  under  divine  guidance  and  with  divine  help,  to 
the  best  of  their  ability. 

If  the  secret  history  of  these  lifelong  and  victo- 
rious conflicts  of  saintly  parents  for  their  wicked 
children  could  be  written  out  for  our  perusal,  they 
would  give  us  many  a  story  most  wonderful  and 
thrilling,  like  those  of  the  eleventh  chapter  of  He- 
brews :  Precious  sons  of  promise  offered  up  with 
Abraham's  faith,  accounting  that  God  was  able  to  raise 
them  up  from  their  graves  of  moral  death ;  kingdoms 
of  Satan  subdued,  promises  obtained,  out  of  weak- 
ness made  strong,  waxed  valiant  in  fight  with  the 
wicked  one  for  their  children,  armies  of  opposing 
obstacles  put  to  flight,  women  receiving  their  dead 
raised  to  life  again,  great  mountains  of  difficulties 
removed  and  cast  into  the  sea,  tortured  with  the 
agony  of  suspense,  yet  full  of  blessed  assurance. 
Thus  it  has  pleased  God  in  bringing  many  wayward 
children  unto  glory,  to  make  their  believing  parents 
perfect  through  suffering. 

Godly  parents  who,  in  such  apparently  hopeless 


34  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

cases,  steadfastly  keep  up  their  prayerful  nurture  till 
the  end,  and,  even  until  death,  maintain  this  their 
full  confidence  unwavering,  never  so  great  as  when 
they  are  faintly  breathing  their  last,  expiring  breath, 
present  a  spectacle  of  sublimity  unsurpassed  here 
below,  the  admiration  of  heaven  and  earth;  and 
when  the  great  object  of  their  faith  is  secured,  and 
the  perishing  one  has  been  snatched  as  a  nearly-con- 
sumed brand  from  the  devouring  flames,  it  must  be 
that  the  angelic  hosts — their  long  agony  of  suspense 
now  broken — fill  the  spacious  arches  of  heaven  with 
their  glad  shoutings  of  victor}^,  like  as  his  father's 
house  was  filled  to  overflowing  with  joy  over  the  pen- 
itent prodigal's  return. 

2.  Obstacles  arising  from  the  imperfections  and 
circumstances  of  the  parents. 

In  accounting  for  this  falling  short  of  useful  re- 
sults, we  must  consider  not  only  the  obstacles  on  the 
side  of  the  children,  but  also,  those  caused  by  the 
shortcomings  and  limitations  of  the  parents  to  which 
a  large  share  of  it  is  owing.  The  failures  pro- 
ceeding from  their  neglect  of  duty  or  from  obstruct- 
ing circumstances,  beyond  their  control,  cannot 
justly  be  laid  at  the  door  of  the  rite.  That  is  ac- 
countable only  for  what  comes  from  its  right  use. 
This  is  so  evident,  and  the  imperfections  of  parents, 
even  the  best,  are  so  well  known,  that  these  few 
words  are  all  that  are  needed  upon  this  point. 

We  have  dwelt  thus  long  upon  the  greater  or  less 
imperfections  in  the  results  of  the  rite  as  practised 
in  this  imperfect  world,  and  their  causes,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  giving  a  correct  and  a  surely  understood  idea 


ARGUMENT   FROM   REASON.  35 

of   their  bearing   upon  the  question  before  us,  viz. : 
The  usefulness  of  the  rite.     We  have  set  them  forth 
in  their  greatest  magnitude  as  seen  only  in  a  few  ex- 
ceptional cases,  for  the  purpose  of  giving  the  objec- 
tion founded  upon  them  the  strongest  position  possi- 
ble for  it ;  and  we  now,  therefore,  feel  assured  that 
these  imperfections  in  results  have  been  so  presented 
as  to  make  it  evident  to  every  candid  mind  that  they 
do  not  disprove  the  usefulness  claimed  in  the  least. 
All  that  is  now  needed,  then,  to  fully  establish  this 
main  point,  is    to    repeat,  in  a  few  words  and  with 
greater  emphasis,  what  has  been  already  indirectly 
shown.     They  are  not  the  legitimate  fruit  of  the  rite, 
not  those  for  which  it  is  in  any  sense  responsible.    It 
is,  indeed,  not  useful  to  some  of  its  subjects,  but  it 
would  be  if  rightly  improved  by  them.     It  does  not 
result  in  the  early  conversion  of  great  numbers,  only 
for  the  reason  that  they  will  not  fulfil  the  obliga- 
tions it  places  upon  them.     It  does  not  prevent  all 
from  becoming  grossly  wicked ;  but  it  does  so  prevent 
great  multitudes  and  would  do  the  same  to  all  if  they 
would  listen  seriously  to  its  entreaties  and  give  heed 
to  its  solemn  warnings.     There  are  those  who  per- 
vert it  to  the  hardening  of  their  hearts  and  the  bitter 
resistence  of  its  claims  ;  they  do  the  same  to  other 
divinely-appointed  means  of  grace.     Multitudes,  by 
refusing  the  salvation  offered  by  Christ,  make  it  that 
he  died  for  them  in  vain,  but  that  does  not  detract, 
in  the  least,  from  the  infinitely  great  usefulness  of 
his  death.     And  here  let  it  be  kept  in  mind  that  pa- 
rental Christian  nurture  is  the  actual  and  only  sub- 
stance symbolized  by  the  rite,  so  far  as  the  agency  of 


36  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

the  parents  is  concerned.  To  baptize  a  child  and 
fulfil  all  the  requirements  of  the  baptism,  then,  is  to 
give  him  a  faithful  Christian  nurture,  in  the  highest 
and  most  comprehensive  meaning  of  that  term — noth- 
ing more,  nothing  less.  To  deny  the  usefulness  of 
the  tendencies  and  legitimate  results  of  the  rite,  then, 
is  to  deny  the  same  of  such  nurture.  Let  it  also  be 
borne  in  mind  that  the  baptismal  formula  used  to 
symbolize  it,  devoutly  administered,  helps  parents  to 
give  that  nurture.  To  deny  this  is  to  deny  the  uni- 
versally-acknowledged helpfulness  of  appropriate 
symbols  and  to  set  aside  the  testimony  of  great  mul- 
titudes of  the  most  godly  and  intelligent  Christians 
the  churches  have  ever  known.  We  may,  then, 
safely  dismiss  the  objection  based  upon  those  imper- 
fections as  wholly  unf-ormed:.  /Uyt^i^A-ti^zMM^ 

A  Supposed  Case:  A  Drama^tvith  two  Scenes. — 
With  the  purpose  of  imparting  greater  vividness  and 
impressiveness  to  this  argument  for  the  usefulness  of 
the  rite  now  completed  we  will  set  it  forth  dramat- 
ically by  giving  a  picture  of  a  baptism  and  its  results, 
which,  while  fictitious,  shall  yet  be  true  to  life. 

First  Scene. — Suppose  a  young  man  greatly  de- 
praved looking  over  the  papers  of  his  deceased, 
saintly  parents  now  sleeping  in  their  graves.  His 
eye  chances  to  fall  upon  the  following  written  upon 
the  day  of  his  baptism : 

"  This  morning  we  took  our  little  babe  to  the  sanc- 
tuary and  there  laid  him  upon  God's  altar  in  bap- 
tism. Thus  early  did  we  publicly  consecrate  and 
give  him  away  to  our  heavenly  Father  as  our  most 
costly   offering  of  love,  in  return  for   the   precious 


ARGUMENT  FROM  REASON.  37 

treasure  given  to  us.     On  the  day  of  his  birth,  yea 
before  his   birth,  we  laid  him  upon  that  altar,  and 
ever  since   that  glad   day  we   have    daily  done  the 
same.     This  morning  we  sought,  in  compliance  with 
the  requirements  of  God's  word,  to  do  this  with  the 
helpful  use  of  the  symbol,  in  its  Christian  form,  of 
the  blessed  covenant  of  promise  made  with  Abraham 
and  his  seed.     In  the  use  of  this  symbol  we  solemnly, 
in  the  presence  of  God  and  men,  consecrated  him  to 
God,  bound  him  to  his  unending  service  and  imposed 
upon  him  all  the  obligations  of  a  believer ;  obligations 
destined  to  rest  upon  him  at  the  commencement  of 
'.his  moral  agency  and  to  continue  with  ever-increas- 
ing binding  force  all  through  his  life  upon  earth  and,- 
also,  in  that  beyond  the  grave.    We  sought  to  pledge 
ourselves,  in  the  presence  of  the  same  divine  and  hu- 
man witnesses,  to  hold  him  as  simply  lent  to  us,  not 
ours  but  his,  to  be  entirely  at  his  disposal.     We  ren- 
dered heartfelt  thanks  for  the  precious  gift ;   such  a 
sweet  fountain  of  happiness  and  hope.    We  earnestly 
prayed  for  grace  to  be  faithful  to  our  trust,  confess- 
ing the    awful,    yet  blessed,   responsibilities  resting 
upon  us.     We  prayed  that  our  church,  now  taking 
it  under  her  watch  and  care,  as  her   ward,i  might, 
also,  be  faithful   to  these  her  covenant  vows.     We 
prayed  for  great  blessings  upon  it  in  all  its  future 
life,  especially  spiritual   ones.     We  prayed  that  he 
might  serve  his  God  in  a  manner  most  conducive  to 
his  glory,  even  if  it  did  involve  great  hardships  and 
sufferings.     We  had   such  faith  in  the  promises    of 

iNot  as  one  of  her  members,  as  none  but  believers  can  be  such,  but 
as  her  ward. 


38  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

our  covenant-keeping  God,  and  were  so  fully  assured 
that  he  would,  sooner  or  later,  give  the  little  one  a 
believing  heart — not  for  any  merit  or  worthiness  of 
ours,  but  of  his  wondrous  love  and  mercy — that  we 
administered  to  him  the  church-symbol  of  faith,  so 
that,  when  he  shall  be  born  into  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,  in  fulfilment  of  covenant-promises,  he  will 
have  the  symbol  of  a  believer  already  on  him — that 
robe  made  and  kept  in  readiness  for  him  at  his  spir- 
itual birth,  as  his  material  ones  were  at  his  natural." 
As  that  depraved  young  man  carefully  folds  up 
and  lays  that  sacred  paper  back  in  its  place,  how 
greatly  he  is  affected !  How  deeply  moved !  He 
cannot  suppress  the  tears  rolling  like  rivers  down 
his  bloated  cheeks.  His  loving  parents,  though  long 
dead,  stand  before  him,  still  pleading  for  him.  What 
sad  memories  of  their  loving  kindness  and  of  his  own 
base  ingratitude  and  wicked  perversion  of  their  self- 
sacrificinor  efforts  for  his  gr-ood  now  torture  him ! 
How  painful  the  afflictive  scenes  of  their  peaceful, 
triumphing  deaths,  which  come  so  fresh  to  his  mind ! 
How  affecting  the  confidence  in  the  covenant-prom- 
ises of  God  respecting  him  which,  like  the  radiant 
beams  of  the  setting  sun,  lingered  and  played  upon 
their  countenances  as  they  fell  asleep  in  Jesus  I  He 
cannot  forget  the  smitings  of  his  guilty  conscience 
he  then  experienced,  nor  his  resolutions  to  reform  so 
ruthlessly  broken.  He  feels  himself  terribly  rebuked 
for  his  life  of  sin  and  strongly  drawn  towards  one  of 
penitence  and  faith,  such  as  his  baptism  demands. 
That  holy  rite,  its  consecration,  its  faith,  its  binding 
vows,  its  confident  expectations,  its  fearful  responsi- 


ARGUMENT   FROM   REASON.  39 

bilities,  rebuke  and  tenderly  plead  with  him.  They 
will  continue  jbo  do  so  night  and  day,  even  to  the 
hour  of  his  death.  He  ma}^,  indeed,  harden  himself 
against  all  these  gracious  influences,  and  thus  make 
them  a  savor  of  death  unto  death,  as  the  power  to 
do  so  inheres  in  him  as  a  free  moral  agent,  but  it 
will  cost  him  a  lifelong  struggle  of  pain  and  torture. 
His  whole  future  career  will,  be  emphatically  one  of 
kicking  against  the  pricks.  But  his  parental  bap- 
tism, in  case  its  great  and  good  influences  are  per- 
mitted to  produce  their  legitimate  results  in  leading 
him  to  repentance  and  starting  him  off  in  a  new  life, 
will  not  stop  here,  but  will  continue  to  act  upon  him 
all  through  life,  as  a  motive  power  to  him  for  Chris- 
tian growth — one  of  the  great  cloud  of  witnesses 
encompassing  him  and  urging  him  to  lay  aside  every 
weight  and  the  sin  so  easily  besetting  him,  and  run 
with  patience  the  race  set  before  him. 

That  young  man  so  tenderly  touched  by  the  picture 
of  his  parental  baptism  thus  brought  to  his  view, 
and  so  painfully  conscience-smitten  because  of  his 
swine-like  trampling  the  precious  pearl  beneath  his 
feet,  finds  himself  "almost  persuaded"  to  become  a 
Christian,  as  by  his  parents  bound.  His  ears  catch 
the  soft  whisperings  of  the  Spirit  saying :  "  Come, 
for  the  door  of  mercy  is  even  now  open  to  you." 
Sad  to  say,  his  ears  also  catch  the  insidious  whispers 
of  Satan  saying :  "  Do  n't  be  so  foolish  as  to  throw 
away  all  the  pleasures  of  this  life  for  a  gloomy,  sad 
religion.  Time  enough  yet.  Say  to  the  Spirit :  '  Go 
thy  way  for  this  time ;  by  and  by  I  will  give  heed  to 
your    so  earnest  solicitations.' "     Thus  two  worlds 


40  INFAKT   BAPTISM. 

are  contending  for  liim,  and  he  stands  halting  and 
wavering  in  the  most  momentous  crisis  of  life  which 
can  be  experienced  by  an  immortal  man.  The  cur- 
tain now  falls  and  he  passes  from  sight,  leaving  us 
in  a  state  of  great  and  terrible  suspense. 

Another  Scene  in  the  Drama. — The  curtain  rises, 
presenting  another  scene  in  the  same  drama.  Sev- 
eral years  have  passed  since  it  fell,  and  the  young 
man,  before  so  penitent  and  apparently  so  near  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,  now  lies,  grown  prematurely 
old  and  greatly  haggard,  upon  his  dying-bed,  close  to 
death's  dark  portals,  swung  wide  open  for  his  speedy 
entrance.  In  that  supreme  destiny-moment  of  his 
life,  following  the  reading  of  that  paper,  he  made 
that  suicidal  choice,  which,  alas !  multitudes  make, 
and  gave  himself  back  again  to  his  great  soul- 
destroyer.  But  he  did  it  at  the  cost  of  a  terrible 
struggle,  with  his  remonstrating  conscience  contest- 
ing every  death-step  he  took  and  piercing  him 
through  and  through,  like  a  sharp,  two-edged  sword 
for  every  one  taken. 

When  a  grossly  wicked  man,  so  greatly  wrought 
upon,  deliberately  rejects  such  a  gracious  call  and  re- 
turns to  his  old  life  of  sin,  like  a  dog  to  his  vomit,  he 
does  it  with  all  his  might.  It  was  so  in  his  case. 
His  stinging  conscience  compelled  him.  The  reaction 
was  very  great;  the  rebound  carried  him  far  beyond 
all  former  experiences.  He  rushed  on  in  his  down- 
ward career  of  wickedness  like  a  mad  man.  Under 
the  fiendish  sj)ell  of  the  wicked  one,  he  pressed  on 
in  his  career  of  wickedness,  with  all  the  force  of  his 
being,  to  the  greatest  possible  lengths  of  depravity. 


ARGUMENT  FROM  REASON.  41 

To  get  rid  of  the  torturing  stings  of  his  outraged 
conscience,  he  stupified  his  sensibilities  by  all  the  de- 
vices to  which  he  could  resort.  He  spent  more  and 
more,  day  by  day,  of  his  rapidly  diminishing  possess- 
ions, in  degrading  carousals — eating  and  drinking 
with  the  drunkard,  bringing  on  redness  of  eyes  and 
getting  wounds  without  cause.  Because  of  his  drink- 
ing debaucheries,  he  fell  down,  oh,  how  often,  in  the 
presence  of  fatal  dangers  and  laid  unconscious  like 
one  lying  down  in  the  midst  of  the  sea,  or  on  the  top 
of  a  swinging,  jerking  ship-mast.  To  gratify  his 
beastly  lusts,  he  spent  his  substance  with  riotous  liv- 
ing, and  devoured  his  paternal  patrimony  with  har- 
lots. Under  the  hardening  and  debasing  influence 
of  such  a  shocking  life  of  loathsome  sin,  he  curses 
his  loving  father  and  mother,  and  derides  their  faith- 
ful nurture.  He  speaks  contemptuously  of  that 
sacred  paper  of  theirs  which  once  so  touched  his 
heart.  He  especially  spites  his  baptism  by  them  as 
interpreted  by  that  paper,  and  scorns  the  bands  they 
endeavored  to  fasten  around  him  and  the  obliofations 
they  claimed  to  impose  upon  him. 

He  indignantly  denies  their  right  thus  to  bind  him 
without  his  consent,  and  scoffs  at  all  demands  founded 
upon  their  bindings.  How  foolish,  as  well  as  wicked, 
his  frantic  efforts  to  free  himself  from  those  bands. 
As  well  attempt  to  strike  the  sun  from  the  heavens. 
His  mad  strivings  to  break  their  bands  asunder  and 
to  cast  away  their  cords  from  him,  were  so  ludicrous 
that  he  that  sitteth  in  the  heavens  laughed,  and  the 
Lord  had  them  in  derision.  By  such  heaven-daring 
deeds  he  became,  more  and  more  each  day,  a  monster 


42  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

in  wickedness,  and  plunged  more  and  more  deeply 
into  its  dark,  foul  abysses.  But  such  a  self-destructive 
career  cannot  last  long.  Health  must  soon  break 
down  and  the  dark  door  of  death  must  soon  be  reached. 
It  was  so  with  him.  That  iron  constitution — his 
priceless  inheritance  from  his  parents  so  temperate 
in  all  things,  and  so  watchful  of  him — struggles  hard 
to  keep  him  from  breaking  down.  Though  so  sorely 
abused,  it  disputes  the  battle-ground  with  death,  inch 
by  inch,  and  keeps  the  foe  at  bay  with  surprising 
success,  for  quite  a  long  time,  considering  its  great 
abuse.  It  was  at  length,  however,  compelled  to  give 
up  the  contest  in  despair  and  leave  the  poor  wrecked 
man  to  die  long  before  his  time.  So  now  he  lies  there 
before  us  upon  a  ragged,  filthy  cot,  as  wretched  as  he 
has  made  himself  sinful — a  terribly  hardened  man ; 
twice  dead. 

As  his  accustomed  grosser  gratifications  have  now 
for  a  short  time  been  beyond  his  reach — not  even 
their  husks  obtainable — his  mental  faculties  have 
rallied  somewhat  from  their  prostration,  and  he,  there- 
fore, now  sees  himself  close  to  the  grave  ;  and  he  rec- 
ognizes, in  his  present  sufferings  and  degradation,  the 
legitimate  results  of  his  sinful  life.  But  his  moral 
sensibilities  remain  still  blunted  and  callous  as  before 
— his  heart  cold  as  ice,  hard  as  a  stone.  He  lies  there 
deserted  of  all  his  old  companions  in  wickedness, 
uncared  for,  to  die  alone.  But  the  Holy  Spirit  which 
has  been  seeking  to  reclaim  him  during  all  his  down- 
ward way  to  death,  has  not  forsaken  him.  He  is  still 
with  him  putting  forth  his  utmost  efforts  to  save  him. 
Because  of  the  priceless  value  of  his  immortal  being, 


ARGUMENT   FROM  REASON.  43 

he  is  most  earnest  to  rescue  him;  to  save  his  soul 
from  death  and  thus  hide  a  multitude  of  sins.  He 
also  wishes  to  have  the  confident  hopes  of  his  parents 
thus  made  good.  But  he  finds  his  efforts  thwarted  at 
every  attempt  because  of  the  great  insensibility  of 
the  perishing  man — like  trying  to  move  a  dead  man. 
He  gives  no  attention  to  what  he  says  and  takes  no 
notice  of  his  repeated  efforts.  In  vain  he  points  him 
to  a  heaven  of  bliss  within  his  reach  ;  he  manifests  no 
interest  in  it.  In  vain  he  points  him  to  a  world  of 
woe,  sure  to  be  his  portion  unless  he  repents  at  once  ; 
he  feels  no  concern  whatever  about  it.  Under  all 
these  Spirit-strivings  he  lies  wholly  unmoved — dead 
in  his  trespasses  and  sins ;  an  apparently  hopeless 
case.  But  the  good  Spirit,  as  a  last  resort,  puts  his 
lips  down  close  to  his  ear  and  tenderly  whispers 
mother ;  and  lo !  his  languid  eye  kindles  up  a  little 
as  if  that  once  charming  word  had  again  touched  a 
responsive  chord  in  his  soul.  This  gives  unspeakable 
joy  to  the  striving  Spirit  and  encourages  him  to  keep 
on  striving.  It  shows  him  not  absolutely  dead  and, 
so,  affords  one  single  dim  ray  of  hope  of  getting  effect- 
ual hold  of  him.  Dickens,  describing  an  abandoned 
woman,  fallen  to  the  lowest  depths  of  sin  and  shame, 
tells  us  that  within  herself — as  within  an  abandoned 
dilapidated  house,  and  away  up  many  a  pair  of  wind- 
ing stairs — in  the  inmost  recesses  of  her  nature,  is  a 
door  and  on  that  door  is  written  woman;  and  that, 
by  ceaseless  knocking,  one  may  hope  to  get  entrance 
to  that  secret  place,  not  yet  wholly  despoiled,  and,  by 
working  through  which,  he  may,  perchance,  transform 
her  into  a  virtuous  woman.     So  there  is  an  innermost 


44  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

chord  ill  the  heart  of  the  callous  heart  of  the  most  de- 
praved wretch,  buried  deep  beneath  the  filthy  rubbish 
of  sin,  which,  in  hours  of  great  calamity,  will  respond 
to  the  magic  word  mother^  and  the  soul-rescuer  may 
hope,  by  tenderly  touching  it,  to  succeed  when  all 
other  means  fail.  Therefore  the  Spirit,  having  touched 
this  chord  and  noticed  a  slight  response,  sets  himself, 
with  new  earnestness,  to  take  advantage  of  this  favor- 
able symptom.  So  he  whispers  again  mother,  and 
repeats  it  at  proper  intervals.  With  gladness  he  wit- 
nesses the  same  eye-kindling,  each  time  slightly  more 
distinct  and  unmistakable.  The  wretched  man,  thus 
repeatedly  touched,  sees  his  loving  mother  standing 
before  him,  charming,  as  in  the  sunny  days  of  his 
childhood. 

Soon  his  devoted  father  takes  his  place  by  her  side 
and  lo,  the  poor  man's  countenance  is  all  aglow  with 
a  long  absent  light.  But  a  look  of  sadness  quickly 
succeeds  and  quenches  this  light.  He  is  now  remind- 
ed of  their  prayers,  their  consecration,  their  faithful 
nurture ;  the  bands  cast  about  him ;  the  obligations 
imposed  and  the  countless  other  good  things  received. 
There  dawns  upon  his  mind  the  sacredness  of  the 
claims  imposed  upon  him.  He  now  finds  these  bands 
still  unbroken,  still  hugging  him  too  strong  and  too 
close  to  be  cast  away ;  never  more  sure  and  relent- 
less in  their  hold  than  now.  He  finds  their  more 
than  iron  strength  and  fastness  greatly  augmented 
by  all  his  frantic  efforts  to  cast  them  off  and,  so,  get 
rid  of  them.  They  are  now  cutting  into  his  very 
soul  by  reason  of  their  thus-increased  strength  and 
tightness.     Now  his  countenance  falls,  and  a  look  of 


ARGUMENT   FROM   REASON.  45 

intense  anguish  and  utter  despair  comes  over  him. 
The  sight  of  his  godly  parents  and  the  consciousness 
of  the  inexorable  obligations  they  imposed,  calls  up 
his  great  wickedness  in  so  disregarding  their  instruc- 
tions and  in  so  thwarting  their  kind,  holy  purposes ; 
in  setting  his  heart  against  their  wrestling  prayers, 
in  blasting  their  fondly  cherished  hopes  ;  in  deliberate- 
ly choosing  and  walking  in  the  ways  of  sin.  He  is 
now  overwhelmned  with  the  conviction  of  his  great 
guilt  which  rolls  in  upon  him  like  sea-billows  moun- 
tain-high. He  now  knows  nothing  but  complete  des- 
pair. 

He  sees  nothing  possible  for  him  but  the  dark  and 
terrible  world  of  woe.  But  the  gracious  Spirit  as- 
sures him  that  Christ  died  for  just  such  great  sinners 
as  himself,  that  he  certainly  died  for  him,  and  that, 
by  his  death,  the  gate  of  heaven  is  open  to  the  most 
wicked,  if  penitent;  that  it  remains  open  till  the 
last  moment  of  life.  Had  he  the  requisite  faith  he 
would  at  once  look  to  him  as  his  sufficient  Saviour 
and  find  his  crushing  burden  removed.  But  he  has 
no  faith.  The  guilt  of  sin  kills  out  faith  and  makes 
its  restoration  to  life  most  difficult  and  prolonged. 
So  he  gets  no  relief  from  being  pointed  to  the  Lamb 
of  God,  that  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world.  God 
cannot  possibly  forgive  me,  he  exclaims. 

The  blood  of  the  Saviour  cannot  atone  for  sins  so 
heinous  and  numberless  as  mine.  "  No,  I  am  lost," 
he  exclaims  in  the  agony  of  despair.  But  the  pitying 
Spirit  says  :  "  Your  believing  parents  obtained  prom- 
ises respecting  you  in  your  infancy  and  lived  and 
died  keeping  faster  and  faster  hold  of  them — promises 


46  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

covering  just  such  a  possible  life  of  sin  as  you  have 
made  actual.  Can  you  not  believe  that  God  will,  in 
memory  of  the  faithful  service  and  implicit  confidence 
of  your  godly  parents  in  him ;  in  memory  of  their 
consecration  of  yourself  to  him  and  their  prayerful 
training  of  you  for  his  service ;  in  memory  of  the 
promises  he  made  to  them  and  of  their  unfaltering 
reliance  upon  them  even  until  death — can  you  not 
believe  that,  in  memory  of  all  these  things,  God  will 
save  even  you,  if  you  will  only  look  to  him  in  peni- 
tence for  mercy,  and  trust  in  his  Son,  Jesus  Christ?" 

This  suggestion,  turning  his  thoughts  again  to  his 
father  and  mother,  gives  another  affecting  touch  to 
that  tender  chord  in  his  heart  which  responded  to  the 
magic  word  mother.  There  now  comes  a  gleam  of 
hope,  called  forth  by  the  possibility  (so  his  small 
faith  will  speak  of  it)  that  God  will,  in  remembrance  • 
of  his  saintly  parents,  and  the  promises  they  obtained, 
forgive  even  him  for  Christ's  sake.  But,  oh,  how  can 
I  repent  so  as  to  secure  forgiveness  for  their  sakes,  he 
exclaims. 

Just  then  these  lines  of  sacred  song  come  to  his 
mind — words  indicative  of  little  faith,  yet  true  to  the 
experience  of  many  of  God's  imperfect  children : 

"I  can  but  perish  if  I  go; 

I  am  resolved  to  try; 
For  if  I  stay  away  I  know 

I  shall  forever  die." 

These  words  of  a  despairing  sinner,  resolving  to 
try,  touch  a  tender  spot.  They  express  the  agony  of 
a  fellow-sufferer,  one  of  like  experience,  to  some  de- 
gree, with  himself,  and  they  call  forth  in  him  some 


ARGUMEKT   FROM   REASON".  47 

little  more  of  trembling  hope  and  courage.  "  Yes," 
he  says,  "  I  can  try.  There  will  be  no  hazard  in  try- 
ing as  I  can  but  perish  if  I  do  not  succeed."  He 
rises  up  to  the  resolve  :  "  I  can  and  I  will  try  to  cry 
for  mercy,"  and,  lifting  up  his  weeping  eyes,  he, 
with  nearly  his  last  breath,  cries  out  "  God  be  merci- 
ful to  me  the  greatest  of  all  sinners."  That  peni- 
tent prayer  is  no  sooner  uttered  than  a  swift-winged 
angel,  right  from  the  throne  of  God,  alights  by  his 
bedside  with  the  edict  of  his  pardon  bearing  the  high 
seal  of  heaven.  He  dies,  yet,  in  the  wondrous  love 
and  mercy  of  God,  and  in  fulfilment  of  covenant 
promises,  he  dies  a  redeemed  sinner — a  brand  in  the 
last  stages  of  consumption  by  the  flames,  snatched 
from  the  burning.  He  sweetl}^  falls  asleep  in  Jesus. 
Angels  bear  him  upon  their  snow-white  wings  away 
to  the  home  of  the  blessed  above.  Oh,  how  gladly  his 
long-waiting,  yet  never-doubting,  father  and  mother 
welcome  their  well-beloved  son,  who  was  dead  but  is 
alive  again ;  lost  but  found.  His  salvation  no  longer 
a  future  certainty  by  reason  of  their  faith,  but  an 
experienced  reality.  They  are  satisfied  because  they 
now  see  the  long,  sore  travail  of  their  souls  rewarded. 
God  has  now  set  his  seal  of  approbation  upon  their 
faith  and  unfaltering  assurance,  professed  in, .  and 
helped  by,  his  baptism.  In  bringing  their  wayward 
son  to  glory,  God  has,  indeed,  made  them  perfect 
through  suffering. 

The  question  here  arises :  Why  did  not  such 
parental  nurture  keep  him  from  such  a  life  of  sin, 
stretching  from  his  early  years  away  down  close  to 
his  grave  ?     We  reply :     The  imperfections  of  even 


48  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

such  a  remarkable  nurture  and  faith  are  a  sufficient 
cause.  God  in  his  wisdom  often  chastens  his  beloved 
servants  by  long  delaying  the  fulfilment  of  his  prom- 
ises, but  never  fails  in  the  end  to  give  them  all  their 
proper  requests  when  they  strive  to  wrestle  for  them, 
in  faith  and  obedience,  to  the  best  of  their  abilities. 
He  never  suffers  his  little  ones,  large  in  faith,  not  to 
receive  the  blessings  asked,  if  sought  under  the  guid- 
ance of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  never  fails,  when  suf- 
fered to  do  its  perfect  work,  to  lead  them  to  ask 
for  proper  things.  He  will,  in  no  case  fail  to  bestow 
them  in  fulfilment  of  his  covenant  promises. 

But  the  great  power  for  usefulness  of  all  saving 
agencies  is  seen,  not  only  in  their  reclamation,  sooner 
or  later,  of  many  desperately  wicked  ones,  but,  also, 
in  the  bitter  hostile  feelings  and  cruel  persecutions 
they  call  forth.  They  are  thus  useful  even  in  the 
case  of  those  finally  lost. 

The  useful  power  of  Christ's  ministry  so  far  as  im- 
mediate results  are  concerned,  is,  indeed,  seen  in  the 
very  few  disciples  it  produced.  It  is  also  seen  in  the 
malicious  opposition  it  called  forth.  That  he,  by 
teaching  and  applying,  with  his  lips  and  spotless  life, 
none  but  the  most  pure  and  elevating  truths,  with 
the  kindest  disposition  and  in  the  Avisest  methods — 
never  giving  any  one  the  least  cause  for  offense — that 
he  should  thus  unite  the  entire  Jewish  nation  and 
the  Roman  rulers  in  malicious  opposition  to,  and  in 
crucifying,  him,  in  the  short  period  of  three  years,  is 
a  marvelous  demonstration  of  the  power  of  his  min- 
istry, the  usefulness  of  which,  in  all  cases,  no  one 
will  deny.     The  preaching  of  the  gospel  would  and 


ARGUMENT   FROM   REASON.  49 

could  not  be  a  useful  agency  if  it  did  not  prove  itself 
a  savor  of  death  unto  death  to  those  who  despise  it, 
as  well  as  a  savor  of  life  unto  life  to  those  who  rightly 
improve  it. 

If  then  the  prodigal  son,  just  considered,  had  not 
repented  in  his  last  dying  moments  and  had  perished 
in  his  sins,  his  mad  perversions  of  his  parental  bap- 
tism would,  all  the  same,  have  shown  in  his  sad  case, 
the  great  usefulness  of  the  rite  in  its  tendencies  and 
legitimate  results. 

Other  pictures  might  be  drawn  representing  cove- 
nant children  as  becoming  Christians  in  early  or  ma- 
ture life ;  but  we  have  chosen  this  of  such  a  dark 
background,  for  the  ^Durpose  of  encouraging  and  com- 
forting those  few  faithful  parents  whose  cliildren  be- 
come desperately  wicked.  We  have  pictured  such  an 
extreme  case  of  depravity  as  a  possible  one,  not  as 
one  often  actual,  for  the  purpose  of  setting  forth  the 
duty  and  privileges  of  parents,  and  the  faithfulness 
of  God  to  his  holy  word  of  promise.  Is  it  too  much 
to  believe,  and  rest  in  God's  covenant  promises,  with 
such  full  assurance,  even  in  such  apparently  hopeless 
cases?  We  have  not  thus  learned  him.  We  shall 
never  question  its  propriety  so  long  as  the  blessed 
Saviour's  touching  story  of  the  rescued  prodigal  son 
and  the  prevailing  cry  of  the  dying  tliief  linger  in 
our  memory.  His  word  of  promise  is  a  solid  rock ; 
and  no  hopes  built  upon  it  can  possibly  fail. 

In  view  of  what  has  been  said  so  much  at  length, 
we  ask,  in  closing,  who  can  measure  the  usefulness 
of  Infant  Baptism  to  its  subjects  when  rightly  used 
and  improved  ?     Who  can  adequately  set  it  forth  in 


50  INFANT'  BAPTISM. 

human  speech  ?  Who,  upon  the  wings  of  a  fervid 
imagination,  can  mount  up  to  its  lofty,  dizzy  heights  ? 
A  sad  fact  that  Christian  parents  and  the  churches 
are  so  little  conscious  of  the  power  savingly  to  bless 
their  children,  which  the  rite,  properly  used,  puts  in- 
to their  hands.  They  should  not  only  baptize  them, 
but  they  should,  also,  strive  to  keep  their  baptism, 
with  all  its  interesting,  solemn  meaning,  before  their 
minds  so  much  as  they  prudently  can. 

Would  it  not  be  wise  for  the  parents  to  prepare 
for  each  child  a  paper  descriptive  of  his  baptism, 
similar  to  that  of  the  parents  in  the  supposed  case 
just  given,  written  in  large  letters,  and  in  an  attract- 
ive style  ;  set  it  in  an  appropriate  frame  and,  with 
the  consent  of  the  child,  never  without  it,  put  it  in 
some  suitable  place  in  his  room,  where  his  own  eyes 
alone — not  those  of  others — would  frequently  fall 
U23on  it  ?  Would  not  this,  or  some  other  equivalent 
method — always  selecting  the  one  best  adapted  to 
the  circumstances — tend  to  keep  him  continually 
under  the  convicting,  converting  influences  of  his 
baptism  ? 

Alleged  Hurtful  Teiidence. — We  are  aware  that 
much  is  said  about  the  hurtful  tendencies  of  the  rite. 
It  undoubtedly  has  its  dangers  to  be  carefully  guarded 
against,  as  is  the  case  with  all  other  divine  ordinances. 
There  is  great  danger  that  even  the  holy  service  of 
praj'er  and  praise,  habitually  engaged  in,  will  degen- 
erate, as  it  often  does,  into  lifeless  formality.  All 
divine  ordinances  when  perverted,  necessarih'  become 
hurtful — their  power  for  evil  always  corresponding 
in  magnitude,  to  that  for  good  when  not  perverted. 


ARGUMENT   FROM   REASON.  51 

What  we  have  said  of  the  nature  and  character  of  the 
rite  shows  that  all  its  evil  results  in  the  past,  of  which 
so  much  is  made  by  way  of  objection,  have  come  from 
its  perversions  and  from  them  alone ;  and  so  furnish 
no  valid  objection  to  it.  Those  equally  hurtful  have 
come  from  similar  perversions  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 
This  verdict  of  reason,  as  to  the  inherent  character 
and  usefulness  of  the  rite,  now  ascertained,  enables 
us  next  to  enter  upon  the  second  main  division  of  the 
argument,  The  Scriptural,  in  circumstances  of  very 
great  advantage.  It  gives  a  very  weighty  antecedent 
probability  in  favor  of  a  genuine  scriptural  basis  for 
it.  Being  not  inherently  wrong  makes  it  possible, 
and  being  so  very  useful,  makes  it  exceedingly  prob- 
able that  such  a  basis,  real  and  sure,  exists  in  the 
Bible. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

IL 

SCRIPTURAL  ARGUMENT. 

Part  First. 

Pkoof  Texts  :  Univeesality  or  Moral  Precepts  ;  In- 
ferences ;  Universality  or  Moral  Institutions  ; 
Certain  Essential  and  Largely  Decisive  Facts 
Established  ;  One  Absolutely  Decisive  and  Abso- 
lutely Essential  Fact  to  be  Established. 

I.    THE   PROOF-TEXTS. 

Infant  Baptism,  if  an  obligatory  ordinance,  must 
have  been  established  bj  divine  authority,  and,  so, 
must  be  found  in  God's  revelation  of  his  will  to  men. 
It  must  have  an  unmistakable  scripture  foundation. 
It  must  be  able  to  point  to  a  certain  record  of  its 
ordainment  by  God  in  our  Holy  Bible  given  us  by 
him, — that  sacred  charter  of  all  the  duties,  rights,  and 
privileges  of  human  beings.  If  it  cannot  there  cite  a 
''  Thus  saith  the  Lord  "  as  a  positive  proof-text  for  its 
authority,  then  its  claim  to  our  acceptance  and  ob- 
servance cannot  l^e  a  valid  one,  and  it  must  be  re- 
jected as  unscriptural  and  unlawful.  In  this  Scrip- 
tural Argument,  therefore,  the  first,  and  substantially 
the  only,  work  before  us  is  to  find  adequate  Bible 
proof  texts  for  the  ordinance. 

Those  of  the  Theory. — According  to  the  theory  of 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  53 

Infant  Baptism,  as  set  forth  at  the  commencement  of 
this  treatise,  the  most  specific  proof-text  is  Gen. 
17  :10  :  "  Every  man  child  among  you  shall  be  circum- 
cised." That  commandment  instituted  the  Rite  of 
Circumcision;  that  rite  thus  instituted  implies,  and 
is  inseparable  from,  its  covenant ;  and  that  covenant 
implies,  and  is  inseparable  from,  that  peculiar  people 
of  God — Abraham  and  his  .seed — who  were  in  cove- 
nant with  him.  Hence  the  Abrahamic  church,^  its 
covenant  and  its  symbol,  circumcision,  are  one  and 
inseparable.  Hence  those  three  institutions  are,  in  a 
more  general,  yet  equally  real,  sense  so  man}^  proof- 
texts,  according  to  the  theory  which  we  shall  try  to 
establish.  Hence,  also,  all  the  numerous  precepts  of 
twBible  related  to  and  implying  these  institutions,  are 
so  many  valid  proof-texts.  Hence  those  institutions, 
as  institutions,  are  of  themselves,  according  to  the 
theory,  comprehensively  and  preeminently  the  proof- 
texts,  inasmuch  as  they  contain  within  themselves 
the  primal  command  to  Abraham,  together  with  all 
the  other  precepts  which  constitute  their  component 
parts. 

These   Abrahamic   Institutions   the    Grand   Proof- 
Texts  in   this   ArgumentP- — To    show  that    they  are 

'For  convenience's  sake  we  here  use,  and  shall  continue  to  use,  the 
title,  Abrahamic  church,  to  designate  the  peculiar  people  of  God,  be- 
fore it  has  been  proved  that  they  were  a  church.  Its  brevity  and 
prevalent  use,  as  such  a  title,  make  it  a  convenience,  almost  a  neces- 
sity—so to  use  it.  But  let  the  reader  fully  understand  that  we  are  not 
unmindful  that  it  is  a  disputed  fact,  and,  so,  one  that  must  be  certainly 
established  before  being  rightly  made  the  basis  of  reasoning.  This, 
its  establishment,  we  promise  to  accomplish  at  the  proper  time  in  this 
treatise. 

2  We  shall  designate  them  as  Institutional,  as  distinguished  from 
Passage,  pro6f-texts. 


54  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

valid  and  adequate  proof-texts  in  reality,  as  well  as  in 
theory,  is  the  work  upon  which  we  now  enter. 

Infant  Baptism  claims  that  these  Abrahamic  insti- 
tutions exist  in  the  Christian  age  in  the  equivalent 
forms  of  the  Christian  church,  its  covenant  and  its 
symbol,  Baptism  ;  and  the  work  of  demonstrating 
this  claim  rests  upon  us  as  its  advocate.  If  we  would 
show  Infant  Baptism  planted  upon  an  immovable 
foundation  rock,  we  must  furnish  conclusive  evi- 
dence that  these  Christian  are  but  other  forms  of  the 
Abrahamic.  We,  of  course,  mean  that  the  two  classes 
are  respectively  identical.  We  do  not  mean  that  the 
church  of  one  class  is  identical  with  the  covenant 
or  symbol  of  the  other;  but  with  the  corresponding 
church ;  the  covenant  of  one  identical  with  the  cov- 
enant of  the  other;  the  same  of  the  symbols.  We 
mean  that  the  two  corresponding  ones  of  each  pair 
are  one  and  the  same  in  substance.  It  rests  upon  us 
to  make  this  their  alleged  identity  so  certain  as  not 
to  admit  of  a  reasonable  doubt.  Just  such  a  demon- 
stration is  imperatively  demanded  of  us ;  and  it  is 
just  such  a  one  that  w^e  now  propose  to  give,  in  cheer- 
ful compliance  with  a  so  reasonable  demand. 

Moral  institutions  are  made  up  wholly  of  their 
precepts,  and  so  cannot  be  binding  unless  the  latter 
are,  and  must  be  if  they  are.  We  must,  then,  prove 
that  the  precepts  of  these  Abrahamic  institutions  are 
binding  in  the  Christian  age.  In  other  words,  that 
they  are  identical  with  those  of  the  Christian  church, 
covenant,  and  sjnnbol.  Baptism.  In  our  efforts  to  do 
this  we  will  now  consider  : 


SCRIPTUKAL   ARGUMENT.  55 

II.     THE   UNIVERSALITY   OF   MORAL   PRECEPTS.^ 

1.  Their  Substance  is  Benevolence P' — All  moral  pre- 
cepts have  for  their  substance  benevolence — good- 
will to  all  others,  a  disposition  to  benefit  them  in 
every  way  possible.  Just  learn  what  benevolence 
demands  of  a  moral  being  and  what  specific  precepts 
will  lead  him  best  to  meet  those  demands,  and  we 
have  the  very  ones  binding  upon  him.  Whatever  be- 
nevolence enjoins  is  right  and  obligatory ;  whatever 
it  does  not  enjoin  is  w^rong  and  the  reverse  of  obliga- 
tory. In  its  high  behests  are  bound  up  all  the  duties 
and  the  only  ones  of  both  God  and  man.  Moral 
activities  are  benevolence  incarnated  in  moral  deeds, 
both  mental  and  manual.  This  grand  substance  of 
all  the  numberless  right  acts  of  moral  beings  is,  in 
them  all,  one  and  the  same  benevolence — not  one 
kind  in  one,  another  in  another,  varj-ing  more  or  less 
frequently  with  specific  acts ;  but  in  every  one  of 
them,  without  exception,  the  one  and  the  same  benev- 
olence. 

But  benevolence  has  an  infinite  number  of  specific 
phases  adapted  to  a  like  number  of  different  circum- 
stances, some  of  which  are  embodied  in  some  corre- 
sponding precepts,  others  in  others.     While,  there- 

1  This  is  the  grand  foundation  stone  upon  which  all  precept-identi- 
ties rest,  and  therefore  must  be  fully  established. 

-  Every  moral  precept  is  made  up  of  two  elements:  Its  substance  and 
its  form,  embodying  that  substance.  In  this  treatise,  much  use  is 
made  of  the  phrase,  Essential  features  of  precepts,  meaning  those 
specific  phases  of  general  benevolence  which  are  embodied  in,  and 
are  essential  to,  different  precepts.  For  example:  Love  for  a  child  is 
that  phase  of  benevolence  which  is  found  in,  and  essential  to,  all  pre- 
cepts enjoining  the  right  treatment  of  children.  These  essential  ones 
are  universal  and  immutable,  like  that  general  benevolence  of  which 
they  are  distinct  phases. 


56  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

fore,  every  precept,  in  a  general  sense,  embodies  gen- 
eral benevolence,  including  all  its  phases,  it  at  the 
same  time  especially  embodies  some  one  of  its  phases 
as  its  specific  substance.  The  command.  Thou  shalt 
not  steal,  has  for  its  specific  substance,  that  phase 
which  has  respect  to  the  property  rights  of  others. 
The  precept.  If  thine  enemy  hunger,  feed  him,  em- 
bodies that  phase  which  respects  the  duty  of  render- 
ing to  all  suffering  ones  proper  lielp.  Every  precept 
embodies  some  one  of  those  innumerable  phases  as  its 
specific  substances. 

2.  This  Benevolence  is  Eternal^  Immutable^  and 
Everywhere  Present. — Universality  inheres  in  its  very 
nature.  Like  God  himself  it  never  began,  and  can 
never  cease,  to  be.  We  cannot  form  a  conception  of 
its  non-existence  in  any  conceivable  or  possible  cir- 
cumstances ;  nor  of  a  moral  being  not  bound  by  it. 
This  is  true  not  only  of  general  benevolence,  con- 
sidered as  a  whole,  but  also  equally  true  of  each  and 
every  one  of  its  phases.  Benevolence  lives  or  dies 
with  every  single  one  of  them.  Let  one  embodied 
in  a  precept  esteemed  the  most  trivial,  cease  to  be, 
and  all  the  other  phases  cease  with  it.  Every  most 
insignificant  right  precept,  then,  has  a  specific  sub- 
stance as  eternal,  immutable,  and  omnipresent  as 
God  himself. 

3.  This  Universality  of  Their  Substajiee  makes  the 
Precepts  Themselves  Likewise  Universal. — This  state- 
ment is  not  disproved  by  the  changeable  nature  of 
their  forms.  The  latter  are  necessarily  subject  to 
change.  They  are  simply  mediums  tlirough  which 
benevolence  exjDresses  its  demands  as  called  for  by 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  57 

circumstances,  and,  therefore,  must  change  with  those 
widely  varying  circumstances.  They  are  the  acci- 
dental, not  the  essential,  parts  of  moral  precepts. 
They  are  just  such  parts  of  them  as  photographs  are 
of  the  men  they  picture.  Its  forms  are  so  unimpor- 
tant relatively,  and  are  so  overshadowed  by  its  sub- 
stance that  the  composite  precept  itself — both  sub- 
stance, and  form — may  properly  be  termed  immutable, 
like  the  substance ;  as  a  man  of  a  mortal  body  is  im- 
mortal, because  his  soul  never  dies.  The  photograph 
through  which  a  man  is  seen  does  not  make  him  any 
the  less  immortal ;  so  the  changeable  form  by  which 
the  substance  of  a  precept  is  expressed,  does  not 
affect  its  immutability. 

4.  The  identity  of  a  moral  precept  is  not  impaired 
in  the  least  by  any  changes  in  its  forms.  It  remains 
absolutely  the  same  in  them  all.  A  Bible-truth 
is  the  same  unchanged  truth,  whether  expressed  in 
the  concrete  or  the  abstract ;  in  the  glowing  tropes 
and  metaphors  of  the  Orientals,  or  the  more  frigid, 
literal  statements  of  the  Occidentals ;  whether  in  the 
distinctive  letters,  words,  and  idioms  of  one  language 
or  those  of  another;  Avhether  in  forms  adapted  to  the 
peculiar  circumstances  of  one  country  and  age,  or  in 
most  dissimilar  ones  adapted  to  the  peculiar  circum- 
stances of  other  countries  and  ages.  In  all  the 
numerous  possible  different  forms  in  which  it  may  be 
expressed,  it  remains  the  same  identical  truth.  This 
is  very  happily  illustrated  by  an  analogy  drawn  from 

The  Persistency  and  Constancy  of  Physical  Force. — 
Scientists  have  discovered  the  fact  that  physical 
force  never  suffers  any  change  in  its  nature  or  qual- 


58  .     INFANT   BAPTISM. 

ity,  but  remains  the  same  and  without  increase  or 
diminution,  in  all  its  varied  forms  of  heat,  light,  and 
motion.  It  neither  ceases  to  be,  nor  knows  any  change 
in  its  substance,  as  it  la3^s  aside  its  dazzling  robes  of 
sunbeams  and  puts  on,  instead,  the  soft  foliage  and 
the  hard,  solid  fibres  of  forest  trees  ;  then  locks  itself 
up  in  black,  carboniferous  coal,  reappearing,  after  the 
lapse  of  ages,  in  the  glowing  furnace  ;  from  thence  go- 
ing out  into  that  endless  variety  of  motion  imparted 
to  machinery  through  the  agency  of  steam.  It  is 
one  and  the  same  force  which  transmigrates  from  the 
sun's  glittering  beams  into  the  carbon  of  animal  food ; 
next  into  the  heat  of  animal  bodies ;  thence  into  the 
strength  and  movements  of  animal  muscles,  and  the 
power  and  activity  of  the  brain  and  its  related  nerves. 
It  is  the  same  identical  force,  now  evoked  by  the  slow 
decay  of  animal  and  vegetable  substances,  again  in 
the  intense  combustions  of  great  conflagrations ;  now 
in  some  noiseless  chemical  combination,  again  in  a 
terrific  explosion.  Just  so  with  moral  precepts, — the 
same  identical,  essentially  unchanged  precepts,  in  all 
their  m-eat  and  innumerable  chano^es  of  forms. 

III.  INFERENCES. 

Certain  Impor^tant  Infe7'ences  DeiHved  from  this 
Universality  of  Substance  and  this  3Iutahility  of 
Forms. 

Inf.  1.  All  moral  precepts  are  identical  with  each 
other  in  the  general  sense  of  liaving  one  and  the 
same  germ-substance.  Just  as  all  parts  of  a  tree  are 
one  as  o-rowths  from  one  and  the  same  seed. 

Inf.  2.  No  moral  precept    can    possibly   be    done 


X 


SCRIPTURAL    ARGUMENT.  59 

away,  experience  any  essential  change,  nor,  for  any 
reason,  cease  to  be.  It  must  always  have  been  such 
in  the  past,  and  must  always  continue  such  in  the 
future — the  same  unchanged  and  unchangeable  pre- 
cept. It  may  and  in  nearly  all  cases,  must  change  in 
its  form  ;  but  its  identity,  as  we  have  seen,  is  not  af- 
fected, in  the  least,  by  all  such  numberless  changes 
actual  or  possible.  It  does  not  follow,  however,  that 
every  precept  of  one  age  finds  its  exact  duplicate- 
form  in  any  single  one  of  another  age.  Its  specific 
substance  may  not  be  found  in  any  single  other  form 
alone.  One  phase  of  it  may  be  be  embodied  in  one 
precept  of  a  different  form  ;  another  phase  in  another, 
etc.  Its  substance,  in  its  different  phases,  may  be 
found  embodied  in  the  forms  of  many  others.  But  a 
precept  so  incorporated  in  the  forms  of  many  others, 
as  even  to  be  undistinguishable,  exists  all  the  same. 
The  conclusive  evidence  of  its  continued  existence  in 
them,  is  that  all  its  obligations  exist  in  them,  for 
substance ;  just  as  they  did  when  and  w^here  it  was 
first  enacted  in  form.  When,  therefore,  two  pre- 
cepts of  extremely  different  forms  are  found  to  enjoin 
the  same  obligations,  they  are  one  and  the  same  in 
that  intimate  sense  in  which  each  one  is  one  with  its 
own  self.  Christ  pointed  the  lawyer  to  tw^o  great 
commandments,  and  assured  him  that  they  were  but 
other  forms  of  all  those  of  the  law  and  the  prophets, 
Christ  gave  a  number  of  parables  setting  forth  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.  For  substance  they  were  all 
alike  and,  so,  were  one  and  the  same ;  differing  forms 
of  each  other.  He  gave  his  sermon  upon  the  mount, 
making  use  of  Jewish  local  imagery  and  adapting  the 


60  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

forms  used,  to  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  his  hear- 
ers. We  must  change  the  forms  he  used  so  far  as 
our  circumstances  are  not  like  theirs.  We  must  not 
often  turn  the  other  cheek  to  one  smiting  us,  nor  al- 
ways enter  into  our  closets  and  shut  the  door  when 
we  pray.  If  a  missionary  in  India  could  take  all  the 
truths  of  that  sermon,  and  give  exact  expression  to 
them  in  language  and  imagery,  peculiar,  familiar,  and 
adapted,  to  those  of  his  mission  field,  he  would  thus 
reproduce  the  real  sermon  of  Christ,  possessing  just 
the  same  authority  with  that.  The  same  is  confess- 
edly true  of  all  correct  translations  of  the  Bible. 
Just  so  far  as  a  translation  gives  the  same  truths  as 
the  original  genuine  manuscripts,  just  so  far  is  it 
the  same  authoritative  Word  of  God,  no  matter  how 
different  may  be  its  forms. 

Inf.  3.  A  precept  binding  upon  any  one  moral  be- 
ing, in  any  time  or  circumstances,  is,  also,  binding 
upon  all  other  moral  beings  in  all  times  and  places. 
The  duty  of  each  one  is  the  duty,  in  other  forms,  of 
every  one  without  exception.  The  laws  of  heaven 
are  the  laws  of  earth  expressed  in  forms  adapted  to 
that  holy  place  ;  and  the  laws  of  earth  are  the  laws  of 
heaven  expressed  in  forms  adapted  to  the  circum- 
stances of  this  earth. 

CORROBORATIONS  OF  THIS  LAST  INFERENCE. 

(1)  Conscience  corroborates  this  last  inference. 
That  the  duty  of  one  man  is  necessarily  the  duty  of 
all  others  in  like  circumstances,  is  an  unmistakable 
dictate  of  conscience.  That  voice  of  God  within  the 
soul  always  acts  upon  it  and  so   recognizes  it  as  an 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  61 

axiomatic  truth.  A  man  seeing  another  performing 
a  deed,  as  in  dut}^  bound,  never  fails  to  have  his  con- 
science bid  him  go  and  do  likewise  if  in  like  circum- 
stances. One  of  the  earliest  moral  conceptions  of  a 
little  child  is  that  what  is  Avrong  in  his  playmate  is, 
also,  wrong  in  himself. 

(2)  History  and  the  drama  corroborate  this  same 
inference.  The  power  and  usefulness  of  history  and 
the  drama,  when  unperverted,  as  confessedly  great 
teachers  of  moral  truth,  is  derived  from  this  same 
source.  They  hold  up  before  us  men  and  nations 
acting  their  respective  parts  upon  the  stage  of  life, 
and  bid  us  learn  our  duties  from  the  characters  there 
delineated.  They  thus  act  upon,  and  so  recognize, 
the  maxim  :  One  man's  duty,  the  duty,  for  substance, 
of  every  man.  Deny  this  fundamental  truth  and  you 
take  away  all  their  power  as  moral  teachers. 

(3)  The  Bible  also  corroborates  this  same  infer- 
ence. That  Holy  Book,  as  a  revelation  of  God's  will 
to  men  of  all  ages  and  countries,  rests  upon,  and  so 
recognizes,  tliis  truth.  It  is  made  up,  largely,  of 
precepts  addressed  to  one  nation,  almost  exclusively 
to  the  Abrahamic  and  Apostolic  churches  ;  and  its 
truths  are,  for  the  most  part,  clothed  in  local  forms, 
designed  to  suit  their  peculiar  circumstance.  But  the 
fact  that  all  the  duties  of  that  one  nation  and  of  those 
few  provincial  churches  are  equally  the  duties  of  all 
nations  and  all  churches,  of  all  times,  makes  the  Bible 
what  it  claims  to  be,  a  revelation  to  all  mankind. 

Inf.  4.  Each  and  every  moral  precept,  not  except- 
ing the  one  esteemed  the  most  trivial,  holds  all  others 
wrapped  up  in  itself. 


62  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

We  might,  if  possessed  of  the  requisite  mental 
power,  strip  off  from  any  one  moral  precept  its  un- 
essential form  in  which  we  find  it,  and  re-clothe  its 
substance — general  benevolence — in  any  other  pre- 
cept-form, and  thus  make  it,  in  a  sense,  another 
precept,  distinct  from  the  first ;  we  might  then  re- 
clothe  again  that  same  substance  in  another  form, 
making  still  another 'precept  in  the  same  sense  ;  and 
so  on,  until  we  have  re-clothed  the  same  in  (one  after 
another)  all  those  infinitely  numerous  and  varied 
ones  which  the  infinitely  numerous  and  varied  cir- 
cumstances of  all  moral  beings  demand.  In  this  way 
we  should  obtain,  derived  from  the  first  precept — 
however  seemingly  trivial — all  the  possible  ones  in 
the  universe.  God  alone  has  the  requisite  knowl- 
edge and  mental  power  for  a  process  of  induction  and 
deduction,  of  such  boundless  magnitude  ;  but  the  fact 
that  he  can  and  does  do  it  is  enough  to  establish  the 
principle. 

True  of  All  the  Jewish  Sacrijieial  Precepts. — Their 
burnt  offering,  for  instance.  The  soul  of  that  offer- 
ing certainly  was  consecration,  one  of  the  grand 
divisions  of  benevolence.  That  soul  imparted  its 
own  character  and  purpose  to  every  one  of  its  numer- 
ous related  precepts,  even  the  most  mechanical  and 
trivial.  Hence,  every  single  one  of  these  latter,  as 
well  as  all  the  others,  ran  down  to  that  consecration, 
that  benevolence,  as  its  source,  and  identical  with  it 
in  substance,  just  as  every  glittering  beam  of  sun- 
light points  back  to  its  fountain-sun,  with  which 
it  is  identical  in  substance.  Hence,  each  one,  with- 
out  exception,   involved  all  the   others,   held   them 


SCRIPTUEAL   ARGUMENT.  63 

bound  up  in  itself.  It  necessarily,  therefore,  also  in- 
volved all  the  other  moral  precepts  in  the  universe, 
as  they  all  grow  out  of,  and  express,  that  same  uni- 
versal benevole'nce.  Everyone  of  the  most  trivial  of 
them,  then,  must  exist  in  all  the  moral  universe, 
either  in  substance  alone,  or  in  it  as  embodied  in  cor- 
responding changed  forms. ^  It  follows,  then,  from 
this  law  of  generalization,  that  all  the  Jewish  pre- 
cepts, of  every  class, — here  assumed  to  be  divinely 
inspired,  and,  so,  morally  binding  upon  the  Jews, — 
must  exist  in  the  Christian  age,  either  with  or  with- 
out corresponding  forms. 

The  physical  world  is  full  of  striking  analogies  of 
this  inference.  The  falling  of  an  apple  is  a  fact  from 
which  may  be  derived  all  the  laws,  and  all  the  results 
of  gravitation  in  the  universe,  past,  present,  and  fu- 
ture. Dr.  Thomas  Hill,  ex-president  of  Harvard  uni- 
versity, tells  us  that  "  The  shortest  fragment  of  a 
curve  contains  the  whole ;  that  could  the  geometer 
know  the  exact  path  of  a  comet  for  the  thousandth 
part  of  a  second,  he  could  from  that  predict  accurately 
its  whole  course  and  orbit,  in  its  journey  for  centu- 
ries, through  the  remotest  bounds  of  space. "^ 

Inf.  5.  All  the  once-binding  precepts  of  the  Bible, 
those  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  well  as  of  the  New, 
are  now  binding  upon  all  men.-^ 

Inf.  6.     All  the  promises  of  the  Bible  are  equally 

^From  "Universality  of  Jewish  Sacrificial  Precepts"— a  Treatise,  in 
manuscript,  by  the  author, 

2Bib.  Sacra.,  Vol.  XXI,  July,  1879,  p.  443. 

3If  ,as  some  claim, there  are  any  Bible-precepts  which  were  essentially 
wrong  when  given,  then  they,  of  course,  are  not  now  binding  upon 
any  one.  This  law  of  universality  makes  them  the  same  now  as  they 
were  at  first. 


64  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

for  all  men.  God  is  not  partial,  but  sincerely  wishes 
to  confer  substantially  the  same  blessings  upon  all ; 
and  he  actually  does  this,  so  far  as  they  will  receive 
them.  His  infinite  benevolence  causes  him  to  wish 
to  do  this.  All  his  promises  made,  and  all  his  privi- 
leges proffered,  are,  as  they  must  be,  conditional 
and  the  only  reason  why  some  are  more  blessed  by 
him  than  others,  is  because  they  better  comply  with 
his  wise  and  essential  conditions. 

Inf.  7.  All  moral  precepts,  together,  constitute 
an  organic  system,  a  moral  Cosmos. 

As  a  tree  growing  from  its  one  germ-seed  is  a 
harmonious  unit  in  all  its  great  variety  of  roots, 
trunk,  branches,  leaves,  etc.,  so  all  moral  precepts, 
because  the  unfoldino-s  of  one  and  the  same  universal 
germ-substance,  benevolence,  must  be  an  organic  S3'S- 
tem  ;  a  Unum  in  Pluribus  ;  its  parts  all  embodiments 
of  this  one  substance  and  in  organic  union  with  it 
and  each  other. 

Corroboration  ly  the  Unity  of  the  Physical  Universe. 
— Prof.  Dana,  in  liis  Manual  of  Geology  (Revised  ed. 
pp.  3,  4),  assures  us  as  follows : 

"Although  thus  diminutive,  the  laws  of  earth  are  the 
laws  of  the  universe.  One  of  the  fundamental  laws  of 
matter  is  gravitation,  and  we  trace  it,  not  only  through 
our  planetary  system,  but  among  the  fixed  stars,  and  we 
know  that  one  law  pervades  the  universe.  The  rays  of 
light  which  come  from  the  remotest  limits  of  space,  are 
visible  declarations  of  unity  ;  for  this  light  depends  uj^on 
molecular  vibrations  ;  that  is  the  ultimate  constitution 
and  mode  of  action  of  matter,  and,  by  the  identity  of  its 
princip)les  and  laws,  whatever  its  source,  it  proves  the 
essential  identity  of  the  molecules  of  matter.     Meteoric 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  Q3 

showers  are  specimens  of  Celestial  bodies  occasionally 
reaching  us  from  the  heavens.  They  exemplify  the  same 
chemical  and  chrystallographic  laws  as  rocks  upon  earth, 
and  have  afforded  no  new  principles  of  any  kind.  The 
moon  presents  to  the  telescope  a  surface  covered  with 
craters  of  volcanoes,  although  of  immense  size.  The  prin- 
ciples exemplied  upon  the  earth  are  repeated  in  the  sat- 
ellite. Thus  from  gravitation,  light,  meteorites,  and  earth's 
satellite,  we  learn  that  there  is  oneness  of  law  throughout 
space.  The  elements  may  differ  in  different  systems,  but 
it  is  a  difference  which  exists  among  known  elements  and 
could  give  us  no  new  fundamental  laws.  New  crystalline 
forms  might  be  found  in  the  depths  of  space,  but  the  laws 
of  Crystallography,  Physics,  Celestial  Mechanics,  printed, 
in  our  office,  would  serve  for  the  universe.  The  universe, 
if  open  to  our  inspection,  would  vastly  increase  our 
knowledge,  and  science  might  have  a  more  beautiful 
superstructure,  but  the  basement  laws  would  be  the  same. 
The  earth,  therefore,  though  but  an  atom  in  immensity,  is 
immensity  itself  in  its  revelations  of  truth  and  science, 
though  gathered  from  one  small  sphere,  is  the  deciphered 
law  of  the  universe." 

Just  SO  in  the  moral  universe.  If  open  to  our 
inspection  in  every  one  of  its  precepts,  it  would, 
indeed,  greatly  expand  our  knowledge,  but  it  would 
afford  no  new  principle,  no  new  precept-substance  ; 
but  the  one  and  the  only  one  of  which  all  precepts 
are  simply  its  mediums  of  expressing  itself.  They 
would  be  merely  repetitions,  in  other  forms,  of  those 
known  to  us — all  contained  in  the  latter,  yea  wrapped 
up  in  each  and  every  one  of  them  ;  all  having  a  gen- 
eral identity  with  each  other. 
6 


66  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

lY.      UNIVERSALITY   OF   MOEAL   INSTITUTIONS. 

All  the  reasons  in  proof  of  the  universality  of  moral 
precepts  just  given,  and  all  the  inferences  just  drawn 
from  them,  hold  equally  true  of  moral  institutions. 
As  the  latter  are  made  up  wholly  of  moral  precepts 
and  have  the  divine  sanction  equally  with  them,  the 
same  universality  must  inhere  in  both.  As  moral 
institutions  they  have  universal  benevolence  for  their 
common  substance,  and  as  they  are  all  developments 
of  the  same,  they  must  themselves  be,  for  substance, 
universal.  Being  made  up  wholly  of  moral  precepts, 
this  must  be  true  of  them  as  it  is  of  their  precepts : 
viz.,  that  they  are  all  identical  in  the  general  sense 
of  having  the  same  common  germ-substance ;  that 
they  exist,  for  substance,  in  all  times  and  places  ;  that 
all  their  obligations  rest  upon  all  moral  beings  :  that 
all  the  promises  of  each  and  every  one  of  them  are 
proffered  to  all  upon  the  same  conditions  ;  that  each 
one  holds  all  the  others  wrapped  up  in  itself ;  and 
that  they  all  constitute  a  moral  system,  harmonious 
in  all  its  parts  and  functions. 

Y.      SOME  IMPORTANT   FACTS  ESTABLISHED  AND  THE 
GREAT    PROBABILITIES    SECURED. 

We  feel  fully  justified  in  devoting  so  much  time, 
as  we  have,  to  this  Universality,  and  these  its  -Infer- 
ences, because  of  their  yevy  great  importance,  not 
only  for  use  in  this  argument,  but,  also,  in  almost  the 
entire  field  of  Biblical  study.  They  are  the  bases  of 
all  scriptural  interpretation,  and  absolutely  essential 
to  its  successful  accomplishment.  All  moral  institu- 
tions rest  upon  them  as  their  indispensable  founda- 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  67 

tioii-stone.     They  all  grow  from  them   by  a  natural 
development,  as  their  legitimate  outcome. 

They  enter  directly,  or  indirectly,  into  the  correct 
decisions  of  all  questions  respecting  such  institutions. 
They  do  so  in  the  case  of  the  identity  of  the  Abra- 
hamic  and  Christian  Institutions,  now  under  consid- 
eration. They  bear  most  directly  and  with  a  great 
deal  of  force,  at  certain  points,  in  that  case,  and  so 
make  them  of  very  great  importance  as  reasons  for 
that  identity.  They  sweep  away  objections  which 
are  alleged  to  be  insurmountable  and  have  always 
been  very  influential  as  weapons  hostile  to  Infant 
Baptism  : — (1)  They  show  that  the  great  dissimilarity 
in  the  forms  of  the  two  classes  of  institutions  is  no 
valid  objection  to  their  identity.  They  thus  furnish 
a  fact  which  is  essential  to  its  establishment.  (2) 
They  show  that  the  circumcision-command  and  all 
the  others  making  up  the  Abrahamic  Institutions,  are 
not  done  away,  nor  out  of  obligatory  use.  (3)  They 
show  that  each  and  all  of  these  commands  are,  in 
their  specific  substances,  binding  in  the  Christian 
Age;  and  that  all  those  many  phases  of  benevolence 
which  demanded  and  found  embodiment  in  every  one 
of  their  precepts,  exist  in  this  Age^  just  as  really 
and  just  as  authoritatively  as  in  the  Abrahamic.  (4) 
They,  therefore,  make  it  exceedingly  probable  that 
they  demand  and  receive  an  appropriate  embodi- 
ment in  corresponding  Christian  Institutions.  (5) 
As  the  Christian  Church,  covenant,  and  symbol, 
baptism,  are  the  only  ones  found  in  that  Age,  they 
make  it  exceedingly  probable  (well-nigh  morally 
certain),    that   they   are   indeed,   the    corresponding 


68  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

ones  predicted,  and  so  identical  with  the  Abrahamic. 
They  thus  furnish  a  very  weighty  presumptive  proof 
of  that  identity,  and  enable  us  now  to  set  about 
furnishing  the  further  proof  required,  under  circum- 
stances of  very  great  advantage.  With  such  form- 
idable objections  removed  and  such  great  probabili- 
ties in  our  favor,  we  are  certainly  justified  in  cherish- 
ing the  fullest  assurances  of  success. 

VI.    THE     ONE     ESSENTIAL     FACT,   AND     THE     ONLY 
ONE,    WHICH   REMAINS   TO   BE   ESTABLISHED. 

When  Columbus,  reasoning  from  acknowledged 
principles  and  facts,  became  convinced  that,  in  the 
greatest  probability,  there  was  an  unknown  continent 
in  the  far  away  West,  he  set  about  the  attempt  to 
test  the  accuracy  of  his  reasoning  by  searching  for 
it,  and,  in  making  its  discovery,  he  fully  established 
that  accuracy.  When  Le  Verrier,  by  calculations 
based  upon  universal  gravitation,  and  certain  astro- 
nomical facts,  confessedly  established,  came  to  the 
conclusion  that  there  was,  most  probably,  an  undis- 
covered planet  in  a  certain  position  in  the  heavens, 
he  directed  the  operator  at  an  observatory  to  turn 
his  telescope  in  that  direction  to  ascertain  if  there 
really  was  one  there  as  thus  predicted.  The  obser- 
vation was  successful,  a  new  planet  w^as  discovered, 
and  the  accuracy  of  his  calculations  was  absolutely 
confirmed.  We  have  just  completed  a  similar  process 
of  reasoning  based  upon  the  well-established  univer- 
sality of  moral  precepts  and  its  inferences,  and  have 
come  to  what  we  regard  as  a  well-nigli  certain  con- 
clusion, that  the  Abrahamic  and  Christian   institu- 


SCRIPTUKAL   ARGUMENT.  69 

tions  are  respectively  identical ;  and  we  shall  next 
proceed  to  test  the  correctness  of  our  reasonings  by 
their  examination,  to  see  if  they  themselves,  as  ex- 
amined and  compared,  give  sure  evidence  of  being 
one  and  the  same ;  to  see  if  the  most  probable,  is, 
also,  the  actual.  Such  an  examination  must  consist 
in  carefully  defining  and  comparing  them.  If  they 
show  themselves  having  the  same  definitions  they 
will,  by  so  doing,  show  themselves  really  identical. 


CHAPTER   V. 

Part  Second. 
The  Abrahamic  Institutions  Defined  NEGATivEiiT. 

In  giving  the  definition,  both  negative  and  affirm- 
ative, of  these,  we  must  carefully  distinguish  between 
the  ideal  and  the  actual ;  between  those  institutions, 
as  they  should  have  been,  and  as  they  really  were  in 
their  history.  We  must  not  accept  definitions  which 
include  illegitimate  characteristics,  as  legitimate 
ones  ;  nor  perversions  of  their  divine  idea,  as  non- 
perversions.  We  must  get  such  an  apprehension  of 
them  as  God  designed  them  to  be  in  all  their  history, 
and  then  see  if  they,  as  such,  have  their  duplicates 
in  the  Christian.  In  determining  what  in  them  are 
perversions,  we  must  use,  as  a  final  test,  the  known 
character  of  God  and  his  holy  Word ;  as  every  thing 
found  in  institutions  ordained  by  him,  in  conflict  with 
his  character  and  word,  must  surely  be  perversions. 
We  must,  also,  ascertain  what  in  them  was  essential 
and,  consequently,  permanent,  as  distinguished  from 
the  merely  local  and  temporary,  subject  to  change 
with  circumstances. 

It  is  only  the  former  that  we  may  necessarily  ex- 
pect to  find  in  any  others  identical  with  them.  In  a 
word  we  must  find  out  just  what  their  divine  idea 
did  sanction  as  authorized,  as  essential  and  as  per- 
manent in  them  as  found  in  bible  his  tor}" ;  and  just 
what  it  did  not  sanction  as  such. 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  71 

We  will,  therefore,  divide  the  question  thus : 

(1)  What  they  were  not?     (2)  What  they  were  ? 

What  These  Abrahamic  Institutions,  in  Their  Di- 
vine Idea,  Were  Not? — Their  divine  idea  did  not 
sanction  the  following  unscriptural  features  as  legit- 
imate, nor  the  following  local  and  temporary  ones, 
as  essential  and  permanent. 

I.  Their  divine  idea  did  not  sanction  the  claim 
that  non-believing  ones  could  be  real  members  of 
God's  peculiar  people,  the  Abrahamic  church;  nor 
actual  parties  in  the  covenant  instituted  by  God,  be- 
tween himself  and  that  Peculiar  People  ;  nor  that  the 
circumcision  of  such  could  be  valid  on  their  part. 

1.  The  character  of  God  shows  this.  That  of  it- 
self alone  necessarily  and  fully  establishes  this  affirm- 
ation. As  a  holy  God,  he  cannot  have  for  his  chosen 
ones,  those  hostile  to  him  in  their  hearts,  as  all  refus- 
ing belief  actually  are.  He  cannot  have,  as  such, 
those  not  capable  of  belief,  as  they  are  not  moral 
agents.  As  such  a  being,  he  cannot  be  one  with  non- 
believing  ones,  nor  with  them  in  a  mutual  covenant, 
the  essential  characteristic  of  which  is  sincerity  of 
heart,  mutual  love,  and  intelligence  enough  to  con- 
stitute one  a  moral  being.  As  such  he  cannot  re- 
gard those  who  have  received  the  form  of  the  rite, 
and  yet  are  destitute  of  faith,  as  validly  circumcised, 
on  their  part,  for  the  reason  that  he  does  and  must 
require  every  good  gift  of  his  to  be  received  with  a 
loving  believing  heart,  as  a  condition  of  its  being 
rightly  and  validly  received. 

As  the  character  of  God,  here  set  forth  in  proof  of 
this  affirmation,  is  of  itself  alone  sufficient  completely 


72  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

to  establish  it,  we  are  at  liberty  now  to  dismiss  its 
consideration,  and  pass  on  to  the  next  one  in  order. 
But  we  prefer  to  consider  further : 

2.  The  confirmation  of  the  same  by  the  Old  Testa- 
ment Scriptures,  by  the  claims  and  professions  of  the 
Jews  themselves,  and  by  the  testimony  of  their  holy 
prophets. 

(1)  The  fact  that  there  were  many  unbelieving 
ones  in  that  church  does  not,  of  itself,  decide  this 
question.  There  are  many  such  in  Christian 
churches  ;  but  it  will  not  be  claimed  that  any  such 
are  legitimate  members.  The  decisive  question  is  : 
Were  they  there  in  accordance  with  its  divine  idea  ? 
Were  they  real  members  ? 

(2)  The  covenant  of  God  was  with  Abraham  as  a 
believer,  and  with  him  only  as  such.  No  one  will 
claim  that  his  faith  was  not  absolutely  essential  to 
his  being  a  party  in  that  covenant.  No  one  believes 
that  God  would  have  entered  into  covenant  with  him 
as  he  did,  if  he  had  not  had  obedient  faith.  No  one 
will  deny  that  this  covenant  with  him  was  one  and 
the  same  with  that  into  which  he  entered  with  his 
seed.  It  follows,  therefore,  that  faith,  on  their  part, 
was  just  as  essential  as  on  the  part  of  Abraham  ;  and 
that  none  of  his  unbelieving  seed  were  or  could  be  in 
that  covenant  with  God.  The  unbelieving  ones  could 
stand  related  to  it  as  those  in  whose  behalf  covenant- 
promises  were  made  to  the  believing  ones  ;  but  never 
as  themselves  being  in  it. 

(3)  The  promises  and  conditions  of  that  covenant 
show  that  God  desior-ned  to  have  none  but  believers 
initiated  into  the  membership  of  his  Peculiar  People. 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  73 

His  covenant  gave  promise  of  the  greatest  possible 
(to  them)  blessings,  and  imposed,  as  a  condition,  the 
highest  faith,  on  their  part,  of  which  they  were  capa- 
ble. Their  most  needed  blessing  was  the  regenera- 
tion (to  borrow  a  New  Testament  term)  of  all  their 
oliildren  at  the  commencement  of  their  moral  agency. 
God  was  certainly  able  to  confer  this,  and  ready  to 
do  so,  if  they  would  exercise  constantly  the  requisite 
faith.  We  cannot  reasonably  doubt  but  that  a  faith 
which  would  secure  the  taking  up  and  hurling  into 
the  sea  great  mountains,  though  itself  like  a  grain  of 
mustard  seed  in  its  smallness,  would  secure  just  that 
unspeakably  great  blessing  to  believing  parents  and 
the  churches.  It  follows  then,  that  God,  in  his  cove- 
nant, made  provision  b}"  which  all  the  natural  seed  of 
Abraham  could  and  should  have  been  regenerated  in 
childhood — each  one,  when  he  first  became  a  respon- 
sible moral  being — and  so  would  be  justly  entitled 
to  membership  with  God's  believing  people.  In  that 
case  no  formal  initiation  would  be  needed,  excepting 
their  previous  circumcision  which  they,  by  their  first 
moral  act — that  being  one  of  faith — would  make  their 
anticipatory  rite  of  initiation. 

We  find  substantially  this  same  view  set  forth  in 
an  editorial  of  the  Sunday  /School  Times  of  July  9, 
1898,  viz.: 

"The  child  of  Christian  parents  and  of  the  Christian 
Church  should  never  know  an  hour  of  conscious  life  in 
which  it  is  at  enmity  to  God  and  requires  to  be  reconciled 
to  him.  He  should  grow  up  into  Christian  living  with 
the  expansion  of  mind  and  affection,  never  sustaining  a 
less  loving  relation  to  God  than  to  his  mother.     This  does 


74  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

not  mean  that  he  will  have  no  battles  with  the  baser  self 
in  him,  but  that  from  the  first  dawn  of  conscious  existence 
he  becomes  alive  unto  God  through  Jesus  Christ,  and  has 
the  purpose  to  do  his  Father's  will  as  the  dominant  motive 
of  his  life.  With  such  a  past  he  can  break  only  by  apos- 
tasy, and  to  his  woeful  loss.  His  breaking  with  the  evil 
within  him  and  without  him  is  not  a  breaking  with  his 
past,  but  holding  fast  to  the  grace  which  is  given  to  child- 
ren as  amply  as  to  elders," 

We  should  distinctively  state  and  •emphasize  the 
bible-truth  that  such  a  child  has,  and  must  have  been 
regenerated  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  no  one  not  "  born 
of  water  and  of  the  spirit"  can  possibly  see  the  king- 
dom of  God.  Thus  interpreted,  the  editor  gives  his 
emphatic  testimony  to  our  claim  that  the  Abrahamic 
Church  might  have  had  all  their  children  regenerated, 
and  so  legitimate  members,  at  the  commencement  of 
their  moral  agency. 

We  regard  it  as  most  probable  that  this  high  ideal, 
thus  held  up  before  them  as  a  mark  towards  which 
they  should  be  constantly  pressing  on  with  all  their 
might,  will  be  fully  reached  by  all  the  churches  of 
Christ  in  the  Age  of  their  promised  millenial  perfec- 
tion. 

Whether  or  not  there  have  been  in  the  history  of 
the  churches  a  considerable  number,  or  only  a  very 
few,  of  such  cases  of  infant  regeneration,  is  a  question 
upon  which  good  men  have  widely  differing  opinions. 
We  think,  however,  that  not  many  would  affirm  that 
there  have  been  none  at  all.  None  are  necessar}^  to 
establish  the  self-evident  possibility  here  claimed. 
But  even  one  single  one  would  confirm  it,  and  so 
greatly  help  to  harmonize  the  policy  of  the  Abrahamic 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  75 

Church  in  receiving  all  the  infant  children  of  her 
members  as  supposed  believers, — becoming  actual 
ones  at  the  commencement  of  moral  agency — with  its 
great  doctrine  of  the  absolute  necessity  of  faith  to 
legitimate  membership  in  it. 

Had  the  Abrahamic  Church,  then,  perfectly  com- 
plied with  the  conditions  of  their  covenant  so  far  as 
possible  for  them,  they  would  not  have  had  any  unbe- 
lieving seed  among  them,  for  the  reason  that  all  their 
children,  becoming  believers  at  the  commencement  of 
their  moral  agency,  would  be  believing  members  with 
them.  God  assumed  that  they  would  be  thus  faith- 
ful and  so  had  them  start  off,  on  trial,  with  regarding 
all  their  children  as  true  believers  entitled  to  mem- 
bership. 

Had  they  complied  with  the  enjoined  conditions, 
even  so  far  as  to  secure  the  regeneration  of  a  consid- 
erable part  of  their  children  in  early  childhood,  they 
would  have  been  justified  in  considering  all  of  them 
as  members  of  the  church.  As  they  could  not  dis- 
tinguish the  regenerate  from  the  unregenerate,  when 
so  immature,  they  must  treat  either  all  or  none  of 
them  as  believing.  It  would,  then,  have  been  their 
-duty,  because  of  their  inability  to  read  the  hearts  of 
the  children,  to  receive  them  all,  both  the  unregen- 
erate and  the  regenerate,  rather  than  keep  out  the 
latter  with  the  former.  This  is  the  policy  of  Chris- 
tian churches.  They  do  not  apply  tests  sufficiently 
decisive  certainly  to  keep  out  all  not  christians. 
They  could  not  without  also  keeping  out  with  them 
many  real,  though  imperfect,  ones.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  the  best  of  them  take  in  more  or  less  of  those 


76  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

not  Christians.  They  act  upon  the  wise  principle  that 
it  is  better  to  admit,  through  charitable  mistake,  some 
who  are  not  Christians,  than  to  keep  out  many  who 
are.  Hence,  in  doubtful  cases,  they  very  properly 
give  the  candidate  the  benefit  of  the  doubt. 

The  question  arises :  Why  did  not  God,  knowing 
that  they  would  not  comply  with  those  conditions, 
direct  them  not  to  regard  any  of  their  children  as 
regenerate  until  they  had  given  other  more  certain 
evidence  of  it  when  old  enough  to  do  so  ?  We  reply  : 
His  way  is  to  lay  down  general  principles  and  leave 
men,  in  most  cases,  to  search  out  for  themselves  their 
wise  application  to  their  circumstances.  He  sees  it 
best  to  have  them  seek  long  and  diligently  for  the 
hidden  path,  and  learn  from  their  mistakes  when  dis- 
covered. Had  they  rightly  studied  those  principles, 
so  clearly  revealed,  they  would,  in  view  of  their  short- 
comings in  complying  with  the  conditions  of  their 
covenant,  liave  required  better  evidence  of  the  regen- 
eration of  their  children  than  the  forfeited  promises 
of  that  covenant. 

(4)  God's  rejection  of  the  natural  seed  of  Abraham 
through  Ishmael,  Ketura,  and  Esau,  and  the  separa- 
tion from  them  of  his  Peculiar  People,  taught  the 
latter  the  obligations  laid  upon  them  to  remove  from 
their  membership  all  unbelieving  ones,  so  far  as  it 
could  be  wisely  done.  This  rejection  of,  and  separa- 
tion from,  those  of  his  natural  seed,  had,  for  its 
reason,  their  apostasy  from  the  faith  of  their  believ- 
ing ancestor.  No  one  will  claim  that  he  would  thus 
have  cast  them  off  had  they  remained  in  that  faith. 
God,  then,  by  so  doing,  gave  them  an  object-lesson 


SCRIPTUKAL   ARGUMENT.  7T 

illustrating  and  enforcing  the  principle  which  should 
govern  them  with  respect  to  all  among  them  desti- 
tute of  Abraham's  faith,  setting  forth  the  grand  pur- 
pose which  they  should  ever  strive  to  accomplish,  viz., 
to  keep  their  membership  strictly  and  only  a  believ- 
ing one.  These  rejections  show  conclusively  that  mere 
natural  descent  and  circumcision,  both  combined,  did 
not  of  themselves  alone,  constitute  a  legitimate  mem- 
ber. They  also  show  that  the  circumcisions  of  those 
apostate  ones  were  uncircumcisions — null  and  void, 
because  not  vitalized  by  that  faith  which  is  absolutely 
essential  to  their  validity. 

(5)  The  excommunications  by  cutting  off  from 
Israel,  enjoined  by  God,  gave  them  a  like  object- 
lesson,  teaching  the  same  duty.  Those  guilty  of  cer- 
tain offences  must  be  cut  off  because  their  conduct 
was  unmistakable  evidence  of  unbelief.  With  God 
the  great  cause  and  the  great  characteristic  of  all 
wicked  deeds  is  unbelief.  Hence  he,  in  enjoining 
the  excommunication  of  those  guilty  of  them,  pro- 
claimed as  with  trumpet-tongue,  the  great  truth  that 
faith  is  absolutely  essential  to  membership  with  his 
people ;  that  without  it  neither  Abraham's  lineage 
nor  his  circumcision,  nor  both  combined,  could  make 
one  a  member. 

Why  then,  it  may  be  asked,  did  he  not  specify  more 
offences  indicating  unbelief,  as  a  cause  for  expulsion  ? 
Doubtless  because  he  knew  that  the  few  given  were 
as  many  as  they,  in  their  great  ihiperfections,  would 
make  use  of  for  the  specified  purpose.  Besides,  as 
we  have  just  noticed,  the  divine  policy  is  not  to  enact 
many  specific  statutes,  but  rather  to  set  forth  govern- 


78  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

ing  principles  ;  enjoin  as  specimens  a  few  of  the  detail- 
duties  involved;  and  leave  their  further  application 
largely  to  the  wisdom  and  fidelity  of  his  people, 
under  the  guidance  of  his  spirit.  The  New  Testa- 
ment specifies  but  very  few  offences  for  church  disci- 
pline. It  wisely  leaves-  it  with  the  churches  them- 
selves to  guard  carefully  against  admitting  unbeliev- 
ing ones,  and  to  remove  from  their  folds,  after  the 
most  faithful  efforts  to  reclaim  them,  all  such,  so  far 
as  can  be  wisely  done. 

(6)  The  Jews  themselves  claimed  that  their  church 
had  no  legitimate  place  for  those  in  unbelief.  They 
strenuously  insisted  that  only  those  possessing  Abra- 
ham's faith  could  rightly  l^elong  to  it.  Great  num- 
bers of  them,  especially  in  times  of  their  great  degen- 
eracy, did  indeed  maintain  that  all  the  natural  seed, 
through  Jacob,  were,  with  rare  exceptions,  real  mem- 
bers ;  but  they  also  maintained,  just  as  strenuously, 
that  they  were  at  the  same  time,  true  believers  and 
must  be,  to  be  such  members.  Each  and  every 
Jew,  without  exception,  professed  himself  a  believer. 
They,  one  and  all,  held,  in  theory,  that  if  any  one 
should  show  himself  not  such,  he  ought  to  be  cut  off 
from  Israel.  Many  based  this  their  claim  for  the  real 
membership  of  them  all,  upon  the  covenant-promises 
of  God  to  them,  in  case  they  complied  with  their  con- 
ditions ;  also  upon  their  self-righteous  assumption  of 
having  always  complied  Avith  them.  Thus  blinded 
by  their  wicked  perversions,  they  falsely  claimed 
legitimate  membership  for  all,  right  in  the  face  of 
such  sinful  lives,  on  the  part  of  great  numbers,  as 
showed  them  certainly  not  entitled  to  it. 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  79 

These  opinions  and  claims  of  the  Jews  have  some 
bearing  upon  the  question  before  us,  for  the  reason 
that  perversions  usually  have  some  phases  of  truth 
for  their  basis,  and  so  testify  to  *the  same  as  being 
the  truth.  They  point,  as  evidence,  to  the  real  facts 
perverted,  of  which  they  are  perversions.  Great  and 
odious  as  was  this  self-righteous  perversion  (their 
assumption  of  perfect  compliance)  by  the  Jews,  it 
still  accurately  points  to  and  confirms  this  absolutely 
essential  condition  of  being  a  party  in  that  covenant, 
aad  a  legitimate  member  of  that  church.  They,  by 
their  grossly  false  assumptions,  confessed  that  what 
they  assumed  to  have  (Abraham's  faith),  they  must 
have  in  order  to  be  legitimate  members. 

(7)  Testimo7iy  of  the  Jewish  Prophets.  While  it 
was  indeed  true  that  the  great  majority  of  the  Jews 
looked  upon  nearly  all  of  the  natural  seed  through 
Jacob  as  true  believers,  and,  as  such,  legitimate  mem- 
bers of  their  church,  largely  regardless  of  the  char- 
acter of  their  lives,  the  same  was  very  far  from  being- 
true  of  their  godly  prophets.  They  made  a  sharp 
distinction  between  those  of  wicked  and  those  of 
righteous  lives,  between  those  who  really  served  God 
and  those  who  served  him  not.  Their  recorded 
words  show  how  scathingly  they  rebuked  the  latter  for 
their  sins,  as  reprobates.  Isaiah  voices  the  sentiments 
of  them  all  when,  as  interpreted  by  the  apostle  Paul, 
he  exclaims  :  Though  the  number  of  the  children  be 
as  the  sands  of  the  sea,  a  remnant  shall  be  saved. — 
Rom.  8 :  27.  The  claim  that  that  holy  prophet  re- 
garded such  wicked  apostates  as  in  covenant  with 
God,  and  as  legitimate  members  of  his  peculiar  peo- 


80  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

pie,  is  absurd.  He  must  have  regarded  them  as  not 
really  in  that  covenant  and  as  not  such  members. 
Those  inspired  men  also  maintained  that  true  faith 
was  essential  to  a  real  circumcision.  They  regarded 
all  those  wicked  Jews  who  had  received  its  form  as 
still  uncircumcised  on  their  part.  Jeremiah  expresses 
the  views  and  feelings  of  them  all  when  he  says  of 
multitudes  of  Jews :  Behold  their  ear  is  uncircum- 
cised and  they  cannot  hearken. — Jer.  6  :  10.  All  the 
house  of  Israel  is  uncircumcised  in  heart. — 9  :  26. 
The  same  appears  in  the  impassioned  defense  of  the 
saintly  Stephen  before  the  Jewish  sanhedrim.  Ye 
stiff-necked  and  uncircumcised  in  heart  and  ears,  ye 
do  always  resist  the  Holy  Ghost ;  as  your  fathers  did 
so  do  ye. — Acts  7:51.  He  evidently  regarded  his 
madly  opposing  hearers  and  their  wicked  fathers  of 
past  generations,  as  both  alike  uncircumcised  on  their 
part. 

The  Jews  did  not  err  in  circumcising  their  non- 
believing  children,  as  that  was  God's  commandment 
to  them ;  but  they  did  err  in  giving  them  the  rite  as 
those  morally  certain  to  commence  their  moral  lives 
as  belicA'ers,  and  in  maintaining  that  its  gift  neces- 
sarily implied  that  they  with  rare,  if  any,  exceptions, 
actually  did  so.  The  rite  had  two  distinct  functions: 
(1)  To  designate  believers  in  covenant  with  God  in 
their  own  behalf.  (2)  To  designate  their  children — 
the  believing  and  non-believing — as  those  in  whose 
behalf  they  were  also  in  covenant  with  him. 

(8)  Does  any  one  object  that  the  Abrahamic 
church  was  simply  a  nation,  nothing  but  a  civil  com- 
monwealth, and  as  such  rightly  included  all  as  legiti- 


SCRIPTUEAL   ARGUMENT.  81 

mate  citizens  without  reference  to  the  state  of  their 
hearts,  we  reply:  God  requires  faith  as  a  condition 
of  legitimate  citizenship,  just  as  imperatively  as  for 
legitimate  membership,  in  his  church.  The  state  is  a 
divinely  organized  body  and  subject  solely  to  his  con- 
trol as  its  king,  just  as  really  as  is  his  church.  He 
demands  faith  of  all  men,  without  exception,  in  all 
their  relations,  as  a  condition  of  legitimacy  in  those . 
relations.  We  should  be  glad  to  consider  at  length 
the  many  questions  and  difficulties  which  this  state- 
ment suggests,  but  the  space  at  our  command  will 
not  permit.  We  will  only  say  that  the  same  princi- 
ples apply  as  those  which  we  have  reasoned  upon  in 
considering  like  questions  in  respect  to  legitimate 
church  membership. 

The  Primitive  Immaturity  of  the  Ahrahamic  Church 
to  he  Kept  in  Mind. — In  passing  judgment  upon  the 
Abrahamic  church  for  not  keeping  more  distinct  and 
visible  the  line  separating  its  true  believing  members 
from  those  non-believing  natural  descendants  of 
Jacob,  in  whose  behalf  they  were  in  covenant  with 
God,  we  should  not  forget  that  it  existed  in  a  very 
early  period  of  human  history,  in  which  a  high  degree 
of  development  could  not  be  expected.  The  Church 
of  God  is  a  creature  of  growth,  by  gradual  processes, 
from  great  infantile  immaturity  to  a  state  of  millennial 
perfection.  We  must  not  expect,  then,  to  find  the 
riper  and  more  perfect  fruit  of  the  Christian  Age  in 
the  earlier  ones.  It  is  enough  that  we  surely  find  in 
the  little  child  the  same  germs,  slightly  developed, 
which  are  to  grow  into  higher  development  all 
through  its  life.  So  it  is  enough  that  we  certainly 
7 


82  INFANT   BAPTISlSr. 

find  in  tliat  primitive  clmrcli  those  principles  revealed, 
more  or  less  clearly,  and  to  some  extent  recognized, 
which  have  been  from  the  beginning  unceasingly 
struggling  for  larger  development,  and,  by  gradually 
ascending  steps,  have  succeeded  in  becoming,  as  the 
ages  rolled  by,  more  and  more  embodied  in  better 
forms,  until  at  length  they  attained  to  the  so-much 
superior  ones  of  the  Christian  age.  God  wisely 
leaves  his  church  largely  to  self-development,  under 
the  invisible  guidance  of  his  Spirit,  and  the  use  of 
that  knowledge  of  his  character  and  will  which  they 
do  possess ;  and  her  progress  is  governed,  to  a  con- 
siderable extent,  by  the  laws  of  the  human  mind. 
The  same  grand  truths  were  with  her  in  her  infancy 
which  have  been  ever  since ;  but  it  took  long  ages 
for  that  comprehension  and  embodiment  of  them 
which  is  now  witnessed,  and  a  great  many  more  will 
pass  before  perfection  is  acquired.  It  took  Christian 
churches  many  centuries  to  shut  their  doors  against 
slaveholders,  and  a  great  deal  more  of  such  progress 
remains  to  be  made.  The  development  still  goes  on 
from  one  degree  to  another  higher  one,  and  will  con- 
tinue to  do  so  till,  after  the  lapse  of  ages,  the  highest 
possible  on  earth  will  be  experienced.  First  the 
blade,  then  the  ear,  after  that  the  full  corn  in  the 
ear.  The  new  and  improved  forms  and  policies 
found  in  each  succeeding  age,  are,  then,  owing  to 
legitimate  growth,  and  not  to  any  change  in  princi- 
ples or  identity. 

What^  and  the  Importance  of  IVhat^  has  been 
Shoivn. — We  have  now  shown,  conclusively  as  we 
believe,    that  the  Divine  Idea  of  these  institutions 


SCRIPT CTRAL   ARGUMENT.  83 

does  not  sanction  any  claim  that  non-believing  ones 
could  be  real  members  of  that  church  of  God ;  nor 
actual  parties  in  the  mutual  covenant  instituted  by 
God  between  himself  and  his  peculiar  people  ;  nor 
that  the  circumcisions  of  such  could  be  valid  on 
their  part.  In  so  doing  we  have  removed  one  of  the 
most  formidable  objections  to  the  identity  of  these 
institutions  with  the  Christian  ones.  If  it  were  true 
that  unbelieving  ones  had  a  legitimate  place  in  the 
former  church  and  covenant,  then  they  could  not 
possibly  be  the  same  Avith  tlie  latter ;  and  if  their  cir- 
cumcisions were  valid  on  their  part,  the  rite  cannot 
possibly  be  the  same  with  baptism.  If  these  things 
were  true,  the  alleged  objection,  founded  upon  them, 
would  be  insurmountable ;  but  as  they  are  not  true, 
it  falls  to  the  ground  upon  the  slightest  touch.  The 
reader,  then,  as  well  as  ourselves,  must  be  deeply 
impressed  with  the  very  great  importance  to  this 
argument,  of  the  truth  now  established  (absolutely 
essential  to  it)  ;  and  this  so  evident,  and  so  great 
importance,  is  our  apology  for  devoting  so  much  time 
to  its  consideration. 

We  would  here  again  emphasize  the  fact  that  the 
character  of  God,  of  itself  alone,  is  sufficient  to  make 
certain  the  truth  we  have  been  maintaining,  so  that 
the  reader  need  not  liesitate  to  accept  the  conclusion 
reached,  even  if  he  finds  himself  unable  to  accept,  as 
valid  reasons,  all  those  which  have  now  been  consid- 
ered. 

II.  Tlieir  divine  idea  did  not  sanction  that  narrow 
missionary  spirit  which  characterized  the  Jews  in  all 
their  history. 


84  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

They  did  not  cherish  a  large  missionary  spirit  with 
reference  to  the  gentile  nations  of  the  earth,  nor  ade- 
quately recognize  their  obligations  to  labor  to  induce 
them  to  become  the  believing  seed  of  Abraham  by 
exercising  his  faith,  a  duty  which  was  enjoined  upon 
them  by  God  in  these  institutions.  All  the  mission- 
ary enterprises  of  the  past,  present,  and  future,  were, 
wrapped  up  in  the  promise  made  to  Al)raham  of  a 
seed  including  all  the  families  of  the  earth.  Prom- 
ises of  the  ingathering  of  the  gentiles  were  dimly  re- 
vealed in  the  provision  for  the  circumcision  and  the 
adoption,  as  Abraham's  seed,  of  the  strangers  dwell- 
ing among  them,  and  in  the  real  or  attempted  ab- 
sorption of  other  peoples,  as  in  the  case  of  Rahab, 
Jethro,  Hobab^  and  others  ;  in  the  preaching  of  Jonah 
to  the  Nineverites  ;  and  the  many  exulting  predic- 
tions of  their  ingathering,  made  by  their  holy 
prophets. 

Yet  the  Jews,  heedless  of  all  these  inspiring  mis- 
sionary voices,  and  full  of  odious  self-complacency, 
heartlessly  looked  upon  them  as  outside  the  pale  of 
salvation,  and  not  as  objects  of  compassion  nor  any 
rescuing  efforts.  Their  sad  departure  from  their  di- 
vine idea,  in  this  respect,  brought  upon  them  untold 
evils. 

III.  Their  divine  idea  did  not  sanction  their  royal 
government  as  the  only  right,  nor  as  the  best,  form  of 
civil  government. 

The  Jewish  form  of  government,  especially  in  its 
later  developments,  is  largely  a  perversion  of  the  di- 

iCritical  Notes  on  Numbers  10:28,  by  Professor  Willis  D.  Beecher,  D. 
D.,  Sunday-school  Times,  July  13.  1895. 


SCEIPTimAL   ARGUMENT.  85 

vine  idea  given  them.  They  were  to  have  no  earthly 
king,  no  state  court,  no  royal  line.  God  consented 
to  their  having  a  king,  in  compliance  with  their 
wicked  urgency ;  but  it  was  upon  the  condition  that 
he  himself  was,  in  every  case,  to  designate  him  by 
the  anointing  of  his  prophet,  and  that  his  appoint- 
ment, so  made,  should  be  ratified  by  the  whole  peo- 
ple, as  in  the  case  of  Saul  and  David.  The  king  was 
to  rule,  in  all  respects,  as  directed  by  himself.  This 
idea,  fully  carried  out,  would  have  given  them  a 
model  government  in  all  their  history ;  in  its  sub- 
stance, the  best  for  all  nations  then  and  now. 

IV.  Their  divine  idea  did  not  sanction  the  exer- 
cise of  civil  functions  by  the  church,  as  an  essential, 
world-wide  policy. 

This  exercise  by  that  ancient  church,  so  far  as 
done  Avisely,  was  not  a  perversion  of  the  divine  idea, 
but,  to  a  large  extent,  simply  a  temporary  expedient, 
in  perfect  harmou}^  with  that  idea.  It  was  not  a 
state  church,  in  the  modern  sense  of  that  term,  in 
which  the  church  is,  more  or  less,  governed  by  the 
state — the  latter  a  distinct  and  separate  bod}^ ;  but  a 
church  exercising,  solely  as  such,  civil  functions  so 
far  as  demanded  by  its  members  and  those  under  its 
care.  There  was  no  separate  civil  organization.  As 
there  was  no  such  civil  government  to  exercise  them, 
the  necessity  of  doing  it  was  forced  upon  the  church 
as  the  only  existing  power  able  to  do  it.  This  must 
necessarily  have  been  the  case  with  Abraham  and  his 
immediate  household;  also  with  Isaac,  Jacob  and 
theirs;  also  with  the  Hebrews  in  their  forty  years' 
wanderings  in  the  wilderness,  and  in  their  residence 


86  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

in  the  land  of  Canaan.  It  naturally  continued  to  be 
so,  as  long  as  they  remained  an  independent  commu- 
nity, subject  to  no  other  civil  power  ;  but  it  of  course 
ceased  when  they  became  subject  to  conquering  na- 
tions. In  the  changed  circumstances  of  the  present 
time,  especially  in  this  country,  Avhen  and  where  so 
large  a  portion  of  the  inhabitants  are  non-church 
members,  it  would,  manifestly,  be  most  impractical 
and  detrimental  for  the  churches  to  exercise  civil 
functions  beyond  a  very  limited  extent.  The  differ- 
ence, then,  between  the  Abrahamic  and  the  Christian 
churches  is  one  of  local  and  temporary  forms,  not  of 
substance. 

V.  Their  divine  idea  did  not  sanction  the  exclu- 
sion of  the  local  church  element  from  the  normal 
structure  of  that  church. 

The  local-church  element,  which  is  so  prominent  a 
feature  of  Christian  churches,  was  not  very  distinctly 
developed  in  the  Jewish,  until  they  were  brought 
under  the  pressure  of  the  Babylonian  captivity ;  but 
it  was  evidently  there  in  germ  from  tlie  beginning,  as 
we  shall  see.  The  patriarchal  families,  of  so  numer- 
ous membership,  maintaining  family  worship  and 
religious  instruction,  as  they  did,  were  really  local 
churches.  Indeed  the  Jewish  church,  even  when 
numbering  millions,  was  in  fact  a  local  church  so  far 
as  common  instruction  and  united  worship  were  con- 
cerned. They  had  one  common  house  of  worship — 
first  the  tabernacle,  next  their  temple.  They  all  met 
together  at  stated  times  for  united  worship,  partak- 
ing of  their  sacrificial  sacraments,  etc.  But  when 
scattered  abroad,  deprived  of  access  to  their  beloved 


SCRIPTUEAL   ARGUMENT.  8T 

temple,  and  unable  to  meet  together,  excepting  as 
little  gatherings  in  their  local  settlements,  they  were 
compelled  to  form  themselves  into  small  local  bodies 
called  synagogues,  for  worship,  instruction,  etc.  These 
correspond  to  the  local  churches  of  the  present  time. 
As  then  the  germs  of  local  churches  are  clearly  seen 
in  the  Abrahamic,  the  difference  between  that  and 
the  Christian,  in  this  respect,  cannot  be  a  radical  one, 
but  purel}^  the  result  of  growth — the  germs  in  the 
earlier  more  fully  developed  in  the  latter. 

YI.  Their  divine  idea  did  not  sanction  their  pecu- 
liar ritual  as  essential  and  designed  for  permanent 
use  in  all  future  time. 

The  peculiar  ritual  of  that  ancient  church  was,  in 
its  forms,  local  and  temporary.  Its  great  design  was 
to  typify  the  promised  great  high  priest — both  priest 
and  sacrificial  lamb.  It  was,  therefore,  largely  sacri- 
ficial. Such  being  its  office,  it  would,  of  course,  as  a 
result  of  growth,  be  remodeled  into  new  forms  at  the 
advent  of  its  great  Antitype. 

These  peculiarities  of  the  Abrahamic  institutions, 
which  we  have  considered  so  much  at  length,  consti- 
tute all  the  important  differences  between  the  Abra- 
hamic and  Christian;  and,  as  they  have  been  shown 
to  be,  either  perversions,  or  of  an  unessential,  local, 
and  temporary  character,  they  cannot  stand  in  our 
way  at  all  in  proving  the  identity  in  dispute. 


CHAPTER   VI. 

Part  Second. —  Continued. 

The  Abeahamic  Institutions  Defined  Positively. 

This  their  positive  definition,  now  called  for,  is, 
in  some  of  its  parts,  incidentally  expressed,  and,  in 
others,  more  or  less  implied,  in  the  negative,  one  just 
given.  For  that  reason  less  time  will  be  required  to 
show,  positively,  what  those  institutions  were  in 
their  divine  idea;  and  the  definite  knowledge  of 
their  perversions  and  of  their  local  and  temporal 
features,  which  we  have  thus  obtained,  will  add 
much  to  our  facility  and  certainty  in  seeking  to 
ascertain  their  divinely-intended  character.  After 
we  have  eliminated  from  corrupted  divine  institu- 
tions (all  those  of  this  earth  made  more  or  less  so  by 
imperfect  men  in  charge  of  them), — after  we  have 
eliminated  all  those  features  which  are  in  conflict 
with  the  character  of  God  and  not  enjoined  in  his 
word,  then  we  may  be  sure  that  we  have,  in  what 
remains,  the  institutions  themselves  as  God  designed 
them  to  be ;  and  that  in  accurately  describing  them 
we  shall  have  their  true  definitions.  We  will,  there- 
fore, now  proceed  to  learn  what  the}^  in  their  divine 
idea  were. 

:r.   THE   ABRAHAMIC    CHURCH.^ 

iln  these  definitions  of  the  Abrahamic  church  we  shall  confine  our- 
selves, mainly,  to  essential  church  elements,  letting  alone  those 
unessential  features  which  distinguish  different  bodies  of  believers 
from  each  other.  The  same  method  in  our  definitions  of  the  related 
covenant  and  sj'mbol. 


SCRIPTUEAL   ARGUMENT.  89 

The  definition  of  that  cliurch  must  be  derived 
from  tlie  nature  and  cliaracteristics  of  that  com- 
munity in  the  Abrahamic  age,  which  the  Bible 
designates  as  tlie  Peculiar  People  of  God.  It  con- 
sisted, historically,  mainly  of  Abraham  and  his 
believing  natural  seed  through  Isaac  and  Jacob. 
They  were  specially  called  to  be  God's  peculiar 
people  in  whom  he  delighted.  They  were  taken  by 
him  under  his  special  care  and  nurture.  From  these 
facts  we  learn  that  that  church  was : 

1.  A  Community  of  Believers  and  of  Them  Alone. — 
As  this  alleged  fact  Avas  considered  at  length,  and, 
in  our  judgment,  fully  established,  in  the  last  chap- 
ter, when  defining  that  church  negatively,  no  further 
treatment  of  it  seems  now  to  be  incumbent  upon 
us. 

2.  An  Organized  Community  with  a  Form  of  Organ- 
ization to  so77ie  Degree  Local  and  Temporary. — It  was 
at  its  commencement  a  single,  small  family,  thence 
growing  into  a  larger  patriarchal  one ;  and  at  length, 
into  one  of  national  dimensions.  A  family  is  a 
divinely-organized  community;  and  a  family  made 
up  wholly  of  real  believers  under  parental  oversight 
and  instruction,  as  Abraham's  was  called  to  be,  is,  in 
itself,  a  divinely  organized  church  in  miniature — the 
parents  its  officers ;  and  one  made  up  of  professed 
believers,  as  w^as  the  Abrahamic  patriarchal  one,  is 
such  a  church,  in  the  usual  sense  of  that  word,  even 
if  many  of  them  are  not  real,  but  only  professing 
believers,  as  is  the  case,  more  or  less,  with  all 
churches  in  this  imperfect  world. 


90  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

3.  A  Coimnunity  of  Believers  in  Covenant  ivitli 
G-od  in  Behalf  of  Themselves^  their  Children^  their 
Felloiv-men^  their  Worldly  Possessions,  etc. — As  those 
especially  called  to  be  the  guardians  of  their  chil- 
dren, the  resj)onsible  keepers  of  their  brother-men, 
God's  stewards  in  respect  to  all  their  powers  and 
possessions,  they  must  be  thus  in  covenant  with 
him. 

4.  In  Covenant  ivith  Each  Other. — This  is  neces- 
sarily the  case  with  all  true  believers  in  the  world ; 
yea,  with  all  the  brotherhood  of  holy  beings  in  the 
universe.  It  is  especially  so  with  all  those  living 
together  in  local  communities  as  neighbors. 

5.  Having  a  Declaration  of  their  Faith. — They  had 
this  in  their  holy  scriptures,  and  in  the  personal 
revelation  of  his  will,  in  many  instances,  given  them. 
This  is  a  matter  of  indisputable  Scripture  record. 

6.  Under  common  instruction ;  united  in  worship  ; 
their  children  under  covenant  nurture.  Their  family 
and  temple  service  show  this. 

7.  Having  overseeing  and  teaching  officers. 

8.  Having  Church  Sacraments. — They  had  them  in 
their  divinely-ajDpointed  sacrifices,  pointing  to  the 
coming  Christ  as  their  atoning  Saviour,  and  in  their 
sacred  symbol  and  seal,  circumcision,  given  them  by 
God  to  designate  themselves  as  believers,  and  their 
children  as  children  of  God's  covenant  with  them. 

Common  to  all  Believers. — It  is  evident  that  all 
these  essential  features  defining  the  Abrahamic 
church,  necessarily  exist  in  all  times  and  places 
where  true  and  faithful  believers  are  found : 

(1)  All  those  believing  ones  any  where  or  at  any 


SCRIPTURAL  ARGUMENT.  91 

time  dwelling  near  each  other  are  a  community  of 
believers.  (2)  They  form,  or  ought  to  form,  them- 
selves into  an  organization  as  God's  servants.  He 
certainly  calls  upon  them  so  to  do.  (3)  They  are, 
as  they  must  be,  in  covenant  with  their  God.  (4) 
And  with  each  other.  (5)  God  will  not,  as  he  never 
has,  fail  to  give  them  some  revelation  of  his  will 
which  they  do  or  should  use  as  their  declaration  of 
faith.  (6")  They  certainly  ought  to  combine  for 
common  instruction,  associated  work,  and  united 
worship.  They  certainly  ought  to  give  their  chil- 
dren covenant  nurture.  (7)  They  do  or  should 
have  the  requisite  officers.  (8)  As  holy  sacraments 
are  confessedly  essential  to  the  spiritual  welfare  of 
believers,  God  certainly  would  not  fail  to  provide 
the  same  for  them.  History  shows  that  those  of  all 
ages  have  been  provided  w^ith  them  as  we  shall 
see.^ 

[No  community  of  men  can  possibly  destroy,  nor, 
by  mere  neglect  or  positive  efforts,  shut  themselves 
out  from  any  institution  founded  upon  God's  truth. 
A  family  may  refuse  to  erect  and  maintain  a  family 
altar  in  their  home,  but  it  is  there  with  them  all  the 
same.  They  cannot  rid  themselves  of  its  obligations, 
nor  make  it  not  ready  to  be  of  great  benefit  to  them 
if  improved.  A  nation  may  decree  to  banish  the 
Bible— burning  up  all  its  volumes — but  they  cannot 
banish  or  burn  up  its  truths,  nor  cause  that  its 
proffered  blessings  are  no  longer  held  out  to  them. 

1  Everj-  divinely-appointed  institution  has,  and  must  have,  all  its 
essential  features  common  to  all  believers.  A  single  one  not  thus 
common,  would  show  an  institution  so  far  not  of  God. 


92  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

Their  mad  efforts  only  add  to  the  relentless  grip  of 
its  holy  commandments. 

So  a  church — its  obligations  necessarily  resting 
upon  all  men  and  its  proffered  blessings  held  out  to 
them  conditionally — does  and  must  exist,  in  its  sub- 
stance, wherever  men,  even  the  most  wicked,  are 
found.  It  especially  exists  Avith  all  believers,  as 
they  confess  its  obligations  and  avail  themselves  of 
its  promises.  They  do  this,  more  or  less  unintelli- 
gently  and  otherwise  imperfectly,  as  they  themselves 
are  ignorant  and  imperfect;  but  to  he  believers  they 
must  do  it  to  some  extent.] 

As  these  definitions  are  common  to  all  believers, — 
and  so  must  be  true  of  the  peculiar  people  of  God, 
it  is  not  necessary  to  use  our  limited  space  in  citing 
the  Bible  proof-texts  which  substantiate  them,  as  we 
should  be  glad  to  do. 

It  will  be  seen  that  all  these  just-considered  char- 
acteristics of  the  Abrahamic  church,  here  shown  to  be 
common  to  all  believers,  constitute  all  its  essential 
ones.  It  follows,  then,  that  that  church  itself  exists 
wherever  faithful  believers  are  found ;  that  it  must 
exist  among  them  all,  in  its  essential  featwes  ;  and 
that  it  most  probably  does  so  in  some  organic  forms, 
where  believers  are  disposed  to  do  their  duty.  This 
fact  should  be  carefully  kept  in  mind  for  use  when 
we  come  to  examine  the  records  of  Bible  history  to 
see  if  those  records  actually  show  an  Abrahamic 
church,  identical  with  this, — in  substance,  not  in 
form, — in  all  the  history  of  God's  people.  It  will 
greatly  aid  us  in,  and  greatly  add  to  our  assurance  of, 
finding  it  so.     The  fact  now  established,  that  all  the 


SCEIPTIJRAL   AEGUMENT.  9B 

essential  features  of  the  Abrahamic  church  must  and 
do  exist  in  the  Christian  Dispensation,  so  far  as  God's 
requirements  are  met,  will  make  it  far  easier  to  show 
that  the  Christian  church  is  identical  with  the  Abra- 
hamic. 

In  thus  setting  forth  these  indisputable  character- 
istics of  God's  Peculiar  People  of  the  Abrahamic 
age,  we  have,  as  we  claim,  conclusively  demonstrated 
the  fact  that  the_y  were  a  real  church  of  God.  That 
they  are  just  the  ones  which  constitute  a  church, 
and,  so,  necessarily  make  the  body  in  which  they  are 
found,  a  church,  cannot,  as  we  believe,  be  reasonably 
questioned.  There  are  no  Scripture  characteristics 
of  a  church  which  are  not  found  in  these,  either  ex- 
pressed or  implied.  We  shall,  therefore,  no  longer 
speak  of  the  Abrahamic  church  as  an  unproved  fact, 
nor  make  use  of  the  term  as  such,  simply  for  con- 
venience's sake.  We  shall  hereafter  designate  it  as 
such  because  it  is  in  very  deed  a  church  of  the  liv- 
ing God.^ 

We  now  proceed  to  define 

ir.    THE   ABRAHAMIC    COVENANT. 

1.  Its  Reiterations. — It  was  announced  in  different 
forms  and  at  six  different  times  to  Abraham  as  follows  : 
Gen.  12  : 1-3  ;  12  :  7  ;  13  :  14-18  ;  15  :  1-18  ;  17  : 1-21 ; 
22  :  15-18.  Once  to  Isaac  :  Gen.  26  :  3-4.  Three 
times  to  Jacob :  Gen.  28  :  13-15  ;  35  : 1 0-12  ;  46 :  2-4. 
Also  to  the   Hebrews  through  Moses:  Ex.   6:2-8. 

lAs  before  promised,  we  have  given  the  definition  of  this  church,  not 
as  the  imperfect  Jews  looked  upon  it,  but  as  God  does  and  must  look 
upon  a  body  who  are  his  Peculiar  People,  and  are  in  covenant  with 
him.  We  have  defined  it  in  the  light  of  the  New  as  well  as  of  the  Old 
Testament. 


94  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

Allusions  to  it,  both  in  the  Old  and  New  Testaments, 
aje  very  numerous. 

2.  Its  Parties. — It  was  a  mutual  covenant  of  God 
with  believing  Abraham  and  his  believing  seed,  and 
only  with  his  believing  seed.  That  there  was  a  cov- 
enant between  Abraham  and  his  seed,  will  not  be 
denied.  That  only  he,  as  a  believer,  and  his  believ- 
ing seed,  as  such,  were  or  could  be,  a  party  to  that 
covenant,  has  already  been  shown,  and  is  too  evident 
to  need  any  proof  more  than  its  simple  statement. 

3.  Its  Fountain  Covenant. — The  mother  of  all 
divine  covenants  having  respect  to  this  world,  is  that 
between  God  and  his  Son  Jesus  Christ,  recorded  in 
the  second  Psalm,  and  the  fifty-third  chapter  of 
Isaiah :  The  Lord  hath  said  unto  me  :  Thou  art  my 
Son  ;  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee.  Ask  of  me  and 
I  shall  give  the  heathen  for  thine  inheritance  and 
the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth  for  thy  possession. 
Thou  shalt  break  them  with  a  rod  of  iron ;  thou  shalt 
dash  them  in  pieces  like  a  potter's  vessel.  Ps.  2  :  7-9. 
When  thou  shalt  make  his  soul  an  offering  for  sin,  he 
shall  see  his  seed,  he  shall  prolong  his  days,  and  the 
pleasure  of  the  Lord  shall  prosper  in  his  hand.  He 
shall  see  the  travail  of  his  soul  and  be  satisfied ;  by 
his  knowledge  shall  my  righteous  servant  justify 
many  ;  for  he  shall  bear  their  iniquities.  Therefore 
will  I  divide  him  a  portion  with  the  great,  and  he 
shall  divide  the  spoil  with  the  strong ;  because  he 
hath  poured  out  his  soul  unto  death ;  and  he  was 
numbered  with  the  transgressors  ;  and  he  bear  the 
sin  of  man}',  and  made  intercession  for  transgressors. 
Is.  53  :  10-12. 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  95 

This  great  primal  covenant  of  God  with  Christ,  re- 
specting fallen  man,  involves  the  whole  work  of  redemp- 
tion, and,  hence,  all  the  other  redemptive  covenants 
found  in  the  Word  of  God,  must  be  simply  branches 
of  it.  They  must  all  flow  from  it  as  from  their  com- 
mon fountain.  They  must  express  some  specific  ap- 
plications of  it;  set  forth  some  one  or  more  of  its 
many  phases.  It  follows,  then,  that  each  and  every 
one  of  them  must  be,  for  substance,  identical  with  its 
primal  one,  as  a  branch  with  its  vine. 

i.  Its  Promises^ — the  3Iore  Noted  Onek^^—To  he  their 
G-od, — -"T^  In  this  covenant  God  promised,  prima- 
rily, to  be  a  God  to  believing  Abraham  ;  his  believing 
natural  seed;  the  believing  alien  servants  in  their 
households ;  and  the  believing  stranger  coming  to 
dwell  among  them.  But,  in  its  more  comprehensive 
meaning,  he  promised  to  be  a  God  to  believers  of  all 
nations  and  times ;  ^  and  in  its  most  comprehensive 
meaning,  he  promised  the  same  to  Christ.  In  its 
largest  sense  it  w^as  none  other  than  the  mother  cove- 
nant itself. 

(2)  A  G-odlij  Seed. — God  promised  Abraham  an  innu- 
merable and  an  honored  posterity,  including  believers 
of  all  nations  and  times — countless  as  the  stars  of 
heaven — and  the  predicted  Messiah,  as  pre-eminently 
his  seed.  He  makes  the  same  promise,  and  makes  it 
good,  to  every  believer. 

Every  believer  has  for  his  children,  all  converted, 

1  In  a  vei'y  important  sense  he  is  a  God  to  all  wicked  men,  holding 
out  to  them  rich  promises  in  case  they  repent  and  come  into  mutual 
covenant  with  him;  but  he  is  a  God  to  those  who  have  actually 
come  into  such  a  covenant  with  him,  in  a  very  much  more  important 
sense.  It  is  in  this  latter  sense  that  he  promised  to  be  a  God  to  Abra- 
ham and  his  seed. 


96  IKFANT    BAPTISM. 

more  or  less,  by  liis  agency,  however  indirectly  or  re- 
motely. For  them  he  travailed  in  birth  and  brought 
them  forth  as  his  children. 

Every  believer,  like  Abraham,  has,  for  his  children, 
all  other  believers.  He  is  one  with  Christ  and,  there- 
fore, is  joint  parent  with  Christ  of  all  the  believing 
children  of  the  latter.  This  is  happily  illustrated  in 
the  family.  Children  of  the  father  are,  also,  chil- 
dren of  his  wife,  because  she  is  one  flesh  with  him. 
A  second  wife  is  the  mother  of  the  children  of  her 
husband  by  a  former  wife,  because  she  is  now  one 
flesh  with  him ;  and  those  children,  if  w^orthy  ones, 
will,  for  that  reason,  recognize  and  address  her  as 
such.  So  every  believer,  being  one  with  Christ,  in  a 
union  far  more  intimate,  enduring,  and  sacred  than 
that  of  husband  and  wife,  has  all  of  Christ's  children 
for  his  own.  Because  of  this  union,  all  things  are 
his. 

Again,  every  believer  has  Christ  for  his  seed,  as 
Abraham  had.  Earthly  parents  have  for  their  children, 
not  only  those  to  whom  they  gave  physical  birth, 
but,  also,  those  who  are  one  with  the  latter — their 
sons'  wives,  their  daughters'  husbands.  So,  as  every 
believer  has,  as  w^e  have  seen,  all  other  believers  for 
his  children,  and  as  Christ  recognizes  every  one  of 
them  as  his  brother,  sister,  and  mother,  it  follows  that 
he  has  not  only  them,  but  Christ,  also  (he  being  one 
with  them),  for  his  seed,  in  fulfilment  of  God's  seed- 
promise  to  Abraham.  Christ  is  the  seed  of  Abraham, 
not  so  much  because  he  came  from  him,  after  the 
flesh,  by  physical  descent,  as  because  he  is  one  with 
that  patriarch's  believing  seed.    Because  of  that  union 


SCKIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  97 

he  must  be  his  seed.  For  a  like  reason  he  must  be 
the  seed  of  every  believer. 

He  is  the  son  of  David,  according  to  the  flesh,  not 
only  because  of  this  natural  descent  from  him,  but 
also,  because  he  united  himself  with  humanity,  en- 
tered the  brotherhood  of  mankind  in  the  flesh.  In 
the  same  sense,  though  more  remotely,  every  human 
being  is  a  son  of  David  because  human  with  him. 
Christ  was,  also,  the  Son  of  David,  according  to  the 
Spirit,  because  he  united  himself  with  all  those  hav- 
ing David's  faith.  The  same  is  true  of  every  believer, 
yet  not  in  such  a  pre-eminent  sense. 

Thus  the  amazing  humiliation  of  the  incarnation 
is  repeated  by  Christ,  in  the  case  of  every  regenerated 
man.  His  Lord  humbled  himself  to  become  his  son. 
He  who  gave  him  his  new  birth,  condescended  him- 
self to  be  born  of  him.  Just  so  he  stoops  to  become 
one  with,  and  so  a  child  of,  every  one  of  his  redeemed 
ones,  that,  by  thus  getting  fast  hold  of  them,  he  may 
lift  them  up  to  heaven.  It  is  evident,  then,  that  the 
promise  of  God  to  Abraham,  of  a  numberless  seed, 
including  Christ,  is,  in  its  most  comprehensive  mean- 
ing, the  priceless  heritage  of  every  believer. 

(3)  A  Dwelling-place  lalieritance. — God  promised 
to  Abraham,  as  the  father  of  all  believers,  the  goodly 
land  of  Canaan  as  an  inheritance  for  himself  and  his 
believing  seed  ;  also  for  those  in  whose  behalf  he  was 
in  covenant  with  them.  Primarily  this  promise  was 
limited  to  this  one  small  province  ;  but  in  its  higher 
and  broader  meaning,  it  included  the  whole  world  as 
the  destined  inheritance  of  all  believers,  when  the 
meek  shall  inherit  the  earth,  and  all  men  shall,  by 


98  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

believing,  become  the  seed  of  Abraham.  In  its  high- 
est meaning  it  included  heaven  as  the  longed-for  and 
certain  everlasting  home  of  all  believers.  God's  im- 
partial and  far-reaching  benevolence  compels  us  to 
give  this  his  promise  such  a  comprehensive  interpre- 
tation. 

(4)  Probationary  Blessings. — He  promised  to  con- 
fer such  upon  their  non-believing  seed,  including,  in 
its  largest  sense,  all  destitute  of  faith.  So  his  benevo- 
lence demanded. 

(5)  These  Promised  Blessings  Permanent. — All 
these  covenant-promises  were  to  be  everlasting,  so  far 
as  men  would  receive  them.  They  covered  all  the 
coming  ages  of  this  world,  and  all  the  never-ceasing 
ones  of  the  world  hereafter. 

5.  Its  Conditions^  the  More  Noted  Ones. — (1)  Faith. 
They  must  be  believers.  Only  such  can  be  in  mutual 
covenant  with  God.  Even  tlie  non-believing  natural 
seed  of  Abraham  himself  could  not  be.  Those  through 
Ishmael  and  Keturah  were  shut  out  from  it  because 
of  their  apostasy  in  non-belief.  So  during  the  entire 
Abrahamic  age,  were  the  great  majority  of  even  those 
through  Jacob  (all  non-believing  Jews).  They  could 
not  be  in  it  because  of  their  unbelief.     Heb.  4:6. 

(2)  Prayer  and  Godliness. — They  must  be  men  of 
prayer  and  holy  lives  in  order  to  be  in  that  covenant. 
This  is  essential  to  the  real  reception  of  any  and 
every  gift  of  God. 

(3)  Self-denial. — As  those  in  covenant  with  a  per- 
fectly unselfish  God,  they  must  deny  themselves,  just 
as  often  and  just  as  far  as  their  highest  usefulness 
made  it  necessary. 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  99 

(4)  Entire  Consecration  to  God. — They  must  daily 
and  hourly  consecrate  to  their  God  themselves,  their 
children,  all  their  possessions  and  interests. 

(5)  Faithful  Parental  Training. — They  must  train 
their  children  and  all  others,  so  far  as  in  their  power, 
for  God's  service,  with  implicit  confidence  in  his  cov- 
enant-promises respecting  them. 

(6)  Common  to  all  ^£?//e^'6?rs.— Substantially  the 
same  methods  of  proof  show  this  as  those  just  used 
respecting  the  church. 

We  next  proceed  to  define  : 

III.    THE   ABRAHAMIC    CIRCUMCISION. 

1.  A  symbol  of  a  believer.  It  was  appointed  by 
God  to  designate  Abraham  and  his  believing  seed  as 
believers.  It  is  a  symbol  of  a  believer  in  the  sense 
that  believers  alone  can  be  really  circumcised  on  their 
part ;  and  that  no  non-believing  one  can  be  on  his 
part.     Jer.  9  :  26  ;  Acts  7  :  51. 

2.  A  symbol  of  God's  covenant  between  himself 
and  believers  in  behalf  of  themselves  and  their 
children. 

•  3.  A  symbol  administered  by  believing  ones  to 
their  children,  to  designate  them  as  those  in  whose 
behalf  they  themselves  are  in  covenant  with  God. 
As  with  all  rites,  the  form  of  this  is  not  absolutely 
essential.  It  may  be  laid  aside  without  impairing  its 
validity  in  the  least,  whenever  circumstances  certainly 
demand  it.  Children  dying  before  the  eighth  day  did 
not  often  literally  receive  its  form,  and  no  females  ever 
did,  but  every  one  of  them  was  circumcised  all  the 
same.    The  substance  of  the  rite  was  literally,  and  its 


100  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

form  was  virtually,  given  to  them ;  thus  making  them 
rank,  as  they  all  did,  among  the  circumcised,  not  the 
uncircumcised. 

4.  A  seal  stamped  upon  this  covenant  between  God 
and  believer,  to  declare  and  emphasize  its  sacred- 
ness  and  surety. 

5.  A  symbol  expressing,  making  prominent,  and 
helping  to  preserve  a  wide  moral  separation  between 
Abraham  and  his  believing  seed,  as  God's  Peculiar 
People,  together  with  those  under  their  covenant- 
nurture  on  the  one  hand,  and  on  the  other,  the  wicked 
people  dwelling  around,  and,  to  some  extent,  unavoid- 
ably commingling  wdth  them. 

6.  A  symbol  expressing  and  emphasizing  the  value 
and  necessity  of  moral  purity,  and  the  loathsome,  sin- 
ful character  of  moral  impurity.  It  especially  empha- 
sizes the  duty  of  cleanliness  from  all  the  low,  debas- 
ing lusts  of  the  flesh.  It  was  chosen  by  God  as  one 
happily  fitted  to  exj)ress,  in  their  climate  and  sur- 
roundings, his  condemnation  and  abhorrence  of  all 
such  vile  things.  It  was,  therefore,  just  the  one 
needed  by  them  in  view  of  the  sickening  sensual 
pollutions  around,  and  to  some  extent  among,  them.- 

7.  In  a  deeper,  and  by  them  largely  unperceived, 
sense,  it  was  a  symbol  of  cleansing  by  the  blood  of 
Christ  from  the  deadly  pollution  of  sin.  Abraham, 
as  a  believer,  was  cleansed  by  that  blood,  and  that 
fact  must  have  been  a  most  important  part  of  the 
meaning  of  that  symbol  appointed  to  designate  him 
a  believer.  Every  symbol  of  one  cleansed  by  the 
blood  of  Christ,  as  is  true  of  all  believers,  is  a  sym- 
bol of  that  cleansing. 


SCRIPTUEAL    ARGUMENT.  101 

8.  A  symbol  of  the  burial  and  resurrection  to  neAV- 
ness  of  life  with  Christ.  Abraham  and  his  believing 
seed  were  buried  and  raised  to  newness  of  life  with 
Christ,  just  as  truly  as  was  the  apostle  Paul.  It  fol- 
lows, therefore,  that  the  rite  given  to  designate  them 
as  believers,  necessarily  symbolized  that  burial  and 
resurrection  of  theirs.  Every  symbol  of  a  believer  is 
also  a  symbol  of  all  that  is  involved  in  his  becoming 
and  being  such.  That  which  is  set  forth  in  formal 
and  emphatic  statement  in  Christian  baptism,  is  only 
the  legitimate  development,  in  process  of  time,  of  its 
vital  germ-seed  inherent  in  circumcision,  as  in  every 
other  symbol  of  a  believer. 

9.  In  a  word,  a  symbol  of  all  the  righteous  experi- 
ences of  those  ancient,  and  all  other,  believers,  and  of 
all  the  truths  in  which  they  believed — all  the  truths 
of  their  holy  religion. 

Commo7i  to  all  Believers. — As  with  this  church  and 
this  covenant,  so,  also,  with  this  symbol  in  all  its 
essential  features — those  just  mentioned — it  is  com- 
mon to  all  believers.  Take  away  its  local  and  tem- 
poral garb  and  we  have  remaining  that  same  sub- 
stance which  is  found  wherever  the  children  of  God 
are  found.  We  need  not  take  time  to  show  this  at 
length,  as  we  did  in  the  case  of  the  church.  To  do 
that  would  be  simply  to  restate  in  corresponding 
terms  what  was  then  quite  fully  set  forth. 

Sure  and  Decisive  Tests.,  for  Future  Use^  Secured. — 
In  these  essential  features  of  these  three  Abrahamic 
institutions  which  we  have  discovered,  we  have  come 
into  possession  of  sure  and  decisive  tests  of  all  those 
of  other  ages  which  claim  to  be  identical  with  them. 


102  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

If  such  do  not  prove  to  have  the  same,  they  cannot 
be  one  and  the  same  with  them  ;  if  they  do  then  they 
must  be. 

With  these  decisive  tests  now  in  our  hands,  we 
next  turn  to  a  careful  and  thorough  examination  of 
the  records  of  history,  to  see  if  they  give  us  institu- 
tions which,  while  of  different  forms,  have  the  same 
essential  features,  and,  so,  are  identical  with  the 
Abrahamic. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

Part  Third. 

The  Abkahamic  Church  :  Its  Covenant  and  its  Symbol. 
Circumcision,  as  found  in  Fragmentary  Forms  in  the 
Pre-Abrahamic  Age. 

It  has  now  been  fully  established  that  these  insti- 
tutions are  universal  in  their  substance,  and  that  their 
essential  features,  enumerated  in  the  preceding  Part, 
are  common  to  all  believers.  It  follows,  therefore, 
that  we  certainly  shall  find  them  in  their  essential 
features  in  that  age,  and  that  the  only  thing  now  in 
doubt,  is  the  finding  them  there  in  corresponding 
local  and  temporal  forms.  Shall  we  find,  in  that 
early  age,  those  same  essential  features,  embodied  in 
other  forms,  adapted  to  the  peculiar  circumstances  of 
that  age,  and  corresponding  to  those  of  the  Abrahamic  ? 
The  presumption  that  we  shall,  is  certainly  very 
strong.  As  we  now  know  by  actual  demonstration, 
that  all  their  essential  features  are  there,  we  have 
little,  if  any,  occasion  to  fear  failing  thus  to  find  them. 

There  is  still  another  fact,  not  before  mentioned, 
which  adds  immensely  to  this  same  probability,  viz.  : 
The  necessity  of  such,  or  equivalent,  institutions  to 
the  spiritual  welfare  of  believers.  Their  necessity  in 
the  Abrahamic  and  Christian  ages  is  shown  by  their 
being  given  to  them  by  God,  and  in  the  good  con- 
fessedly   experienced    by   them.      Believers    before 


104  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

Abraham,  must  have  needed  them  just  as  much,  if 
not  more.  They,  like  all  believers,  needed  a  church 
home,  a  recognized  brotherhood,  ^yith  creed  and  cove- 
nant; one  formed  and  kept  u^d  for  united  worship, 
common  instruction,  and  cooperative  work.  They 
needed,  and  to  secure  their  highest  good,  must  have 
had,  such  a  brotherhood, — a  visible,  tangible  organi- 
zation, instituted  by  God  as  his  kingdom  on  earth. 
They  also  needed  to  have  that  covenant,  necessarily 
existing  between  themselves  as  believers  and  their 
God,  recognized,  set  forth  and  emphasized  as  to  its 
great  importance,  by  God  himself  in  his  own  revela- 
tion to  them.  Such  a  revelation  would  greatly  aug- 
ment its  power  to  minister  to  their  peace  and  com- 
fort— just  what  they,  more  than  those  of  later  ages, 
needed. 

Again :  They  needed  symbols  and  seals  of  this  cov- 
enant, like  circumcision  and  baptism,  impressively 
picturing  to  themselves  and  the  world  the  great  truths 
of  their  faith,  and  emphasizing  its  sacredness. 

Universal  Necessity  and  G-reat  Usefulness  of  Sym- 
bols.— Symbols  are  a  universal  necessity  among  men ; 
essential  to  their  welfare  in  all  relations  and  condi- 
tions, as  the  history  of  the  world  abundantly  shows. 
Nations  must  have  their  sacred  flags  and  monuments 
eloquent  with  national  stor}^,  dear  to  every  true  citi- 
zen as  the  apple  of  his  eye.  Armies  and  navies  must 
have  their  colors  around  which  the  shouting  men  do 
rally  in  the  thick  of  battle  with  their  votive  lives  in 
their  hands.  Churches  must  have  their  holy  sacra- 
ments as  helps  to  communion  with  their  God,  incen- 
tives to  self-denying  service,  giving  support  in  trials. 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  105 

and  ministering  sweet  consolation  in  the  solemn  hour 
of  death. 

By  means  of  their  ensign,  emblazoned  with  inspir- 
ing emblems  of  national  character  and  achievement, 
many  millions  of  citizens  unite  to  utter  terrific  words 
of  warning  to  their  country's  foes,  and  soul-stirring 
ones  of  certain  protection  to  her  friends.  Through  it, 
streaming  like  a  blazing  flame  of  fire  from  flag-staff 
tops,  they  join  in  the  same  grand  choral  song  of 
patriotic  devotion  to  their  beloved  country  and  their 
fellow-citizens.  The  very  sight  of  it  waving  in  the 
air,  filled  with  the  wafting  breezes,  gleaming  in  the 
dazzling  sunlight,  is  an  inspiration.  Around  it  high 
and  low,  rich  and  poor,  gather  in  hours  of  national 
peril,  and  the  glad  triumph  of  victor3^  The  same, 
in  varying  degree,  is  true  of  all  appropriate  symbols. 
They  educate  the  mind,  touch  the  heart,  and  ennoble 
character  as  few  other  agencies  do  or  can.  As 
embodiments  of  much-loved  and  greatly-venerated 
truths,  they  are  to  all  men  their  most  impressive 
speech;  the  language  through  which  they  express 
their  thoughts  most  eloquently  and  effectively;  the 
polished  diction  of  the  unlearned  and  learned  alike  ; 
a  tongue  by  which  even  the  dumb  speak  with  flu- 
ency and  power.  It  is  for  such  reasons  that  they  are 
so  essential  to  all  men;  so  indispensable  to  their  wel- 
fare. For  such  reasons  God  furnished  his  Abrahamic 
church  with  them.  For  the  same  reasons  they  were 
just  as  essential,  if  not  more  so,  to  believers  before 
Abraham.^ 

ilf  the  reader  shall  look  upon  this  episode  as  far-fetched,  and  while 
really,  yet  not  especially,  applicable,  it  is  hoped  that  he  will  find  it  a 
welcome  momentary  relief,  by  way  of  diversion,  from  the  continued 
strain  of  an  uninterrupted  lengthy  argument. 


106  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

There  is,  also,  a  like  universal  necessity  for  appro- 
priate seals  (seals  are  one  class  of  symbols)  to  im- 
press with,  the  sacredness,  and  give  assurance  of  the 
certain  fulfilment,  of  solemn  covenants ;  as  appears 
from  their  use  for  such  purposes,  both  in  the  religious 
and  the  secular  world,  and  among  men  of  every 
grade  of  society,  from  the  most  barbarous  to  the 
most  cultured  and  Christian.  Can  it  be  supposed, 
then,  that  in  those  primitive  times  their  heavenly 
Father  refused  or  neglected  fully  to  meet  these  so 
great  wants  of  those  his  believing  children  with 
whom  He  was  in  loving  covenant?  Can  it  be  that 
He,  Avho  carefully  and  with  such  scrupulous  pains, 
nurtures  every  one  of  his  little  ones,  as  a  tender- 
hearted mother  her  child,  failed  thus  to  provide  for 
them  ?  Is  it  possible  that  the  Good  Shepherd  so  left 
his  precious  sheep  without  a  fold  for  two  thousand 
years?  We  have  not  so  learned  our  heavenly 
Father. 

The  probabilities  that  these  institutions,  as  em- 
bodied in  local  and  temporary  forms,  existed  with 
believers  in  all  the  pre-Abrahamic  age,  are,  then, 
very  great  indeed,  as  we  have  seen  by  the  facts  con- 
sidered in  chapters  V  and  Yl ;  but  great  as  they  Avere 
made  by  them,  they  are  made  still  greater  by  those 
just  considered — this  their  pressing  need  of  them. 
All  these  facts  together,  therefore,  give  us  probabili- 
ties amounting,  well-nigh,  if  not  quite,  to  moral 
certainty.  We  shall,  consequently,  start  off  in  this 
our  historic  search  with  the  fullest  assurance  of 
finding  in  that  age  a  divinely-instituted  church;  a 
divinely-recognized  covenant,  and  a  divinely-appoint- 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  107 

ed  sjaiibol  and  seal,  corresponding,  respectively,  to 
the  Abrahamic  ones. 

Success  7iot  Absolutely  Essential. — While  most 
eagar  and  confident  of  finding  them  there,  as  ex- 
pected, we  still  do  not  look  upon  our  success  in  the 
attempt  as  absolutely  essential  to  our  argument. 
That  does  not  entirely  hang  upon  the  existence  of 
those  institutions,  in  organized  forms,  at  that  early 
period.  It  is  sufficient  for  its  validity,  that  they,  as 
clearly  shown,  existed  then  in  their  essential  fea- 
tures— those  essential  to  the  institutions  themselves, 
and,  also,  common  to  all  believers.  While  it  is  most 
improbable,  it  is  yet  possible,  that  they  then  existed 
without  such  distinctively-organized  forms  until  the 
Abrahamic  age.  But  the  demonstrated  fact  that 
they  certainly  were  there  in  all  their  essential  fea- 
tures, fully  meets  the  demands  of  this  argument. 

I.  The  Adamic  Church,  Covenant,  and  Symbol,  Be- 
fore the  Fall. — We  think  we  find  just  such  organized 
forms  in  the  garden  of  Eden. 

Unfallen  Adam  and  Eve  were  a  family,  and  a 
family  is  pre-eminently  a  divinely-organized  body. 
They  were  perfect  believers,  not  in  Christ  as  their 
Saviour,  they  needed  none,  but  as  their  God.  As  a 
believing  family,  they  were  an  organized  body  of 
believers.  They  were  necessarily  in  covenant  with 
their  God  respecting  themselves  and  their  seed. 
That  they  were  not  left  without  needed  symbols  and 
seals  is  made  evident  by  the  tree  of  life  and  that  of 
the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil  given  them.  These 
certain  and  decisive  facts,  found  in  their  exceedingly 
meagre  history  in  our  possession,  suggest  the  related 
ones  not  mentioned. 


108  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

II.  The  Adamic  Church.  Covenarit,  and  Symbol^ 
After  the  Fall. — We  think  we  find  just  such  organ- 
ized forms  in  the  succeeding  Adamic  centuries. 

(1)  Fallen  Adam  and  Eve  were  an  organized  body 
— a  family.  When  regenerated,  as  we  suppose  they 
were,  they  became  an  organized  body  of  believers. 
They  had,  or  should  have  had,  united  worship,  com- 
mon instruction,  etc.  They  had  family  officers.  The 
sacrifices  of  Cain  and  Abel  show  that,  in  the  family 
of  Adam,  there  was  stated  worship,  through  symbols 
and  seals  pointing  to  Christ.  They  had  personal 
revelations  from  God,  few  and  meagre  it  may  be,  yet 
sufficient  in  the  judgment  of  God,  for  their  necessi- 
ties. As  regenerated  ones  they  certainly  were  in 
covenant  with  their  God  and  each  other.  Hence, 
with  the  covenant-symbols  and  seals  given  them 
(as  will  soon  appear)  they  were  a  divinely-organized 
church. 

(2)  God's  covenant  with  them  and  their  believing 
seed  was  announced  in  the  curse  pronounced  upon 
their  wicked  seducer :  And  I  will  put  enmity  be- 
tween thee  and  the  woman,  and  between  thy  seed 
and  her  seed.  It  shall  bruise  thy  head,  and 
thou  shalt  bruise  its  heel.  Gen.  3  :  15.  As  the  seed 
of  the  woman,  here  named,  has  especial,  though  not 
exclusive,  reference  to  Christ,  the  conflict  predicted 
is  that  between  Christ  and  believers,  on  the  one 
side,  and  Satan  and  wicked  men,  on  the  other,  which 
was  destined  to  prevail  in  the  world  until  the  final 
and  complete  triumph  of  the  former.  Consequently 
the  connected  promise.  It  shall  bruise  thy  head 
(fatally),  takes  in  all  of  God's  helpful  and  efficient 


SCKIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  109 

workings,  through  his  chosen  ones,  during  the  entire 
conflict ;  also,  all  the  instrumentalities  by  him  made 
use  of,  in  the  same.  It  must,  especially,  take  in  all 
his  future  gracious  covenants  with  believers,  includ- 
ing the  Abrahamic.  Hence  this  covenant  with  Adam 
must  include  and,  so,  be  identical  with,  the  Abra- 
hamic. It  also  must  be  included  in,  and  so  be 
identical  with,  that  made  with  Christ  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world.  This  is  further  evident 
from  the  identity,  for  substance,  of  their  promises 
and  conditions,  as  the  following  few  words  will 
show  : 

The  very  first  command  to  Adam,  and  afterwards 
to  Noah,  and,  through  them,  to  the  human  race,  viz. : 
"  Be  fruitful  and  multiply  and  replenish  the  earth," 
etc.,  involved  a  covenant  identical  with  the  Abra- 
hamic. The  command,  "  Be  fruitful,"  imposed  the 
obligation  faithfully  to  train  their  children  for  God, 
2'elying  upon  divine  help  and  making  use  of  all  the 
means  in  their  power.  This  involved  the  promise  by 
God  to  render  them  all  needed  assistance.  What  are 
these  commands,  mutual  promises,  and  conditions  but 
the  covenant  made  with  Abraham  ?  As  before  shown, 
that  covenant  is  nothing  more  nor  less  than  that 
which  necessarily  exists  between  God  and  all  his 
believing  ones.  That  same  covenant  is,  in  like  man- 
ner, wrapped  up  in  every  one  of  God's  commands  to 
men.  God  imposes  no  duties  without  gracious  prom- 
ises and  necessary  conditions  ;  and,  so  far  as  men 
receive  as  good,  and  faithfully  comply  with,  them, 
they  are  all  mutual  covenants,  and  sources  of  price- 
less blessings. 


110  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

(3)  In  announcing  this  blessed  covenant  to  Aclam, 
Ood  makes  use  of  a  remarkable  metaphor.  He  takes 
to  picture  it,  one  of  the  most  noteworthy  facts  of 
natural  history  known  to  men,  viz. :  the  aversion  of 
all  men  and  Avomen — especially  the  latter — for  ser- 
pents ;  the  universal  propensity  of  men  to  kill  them, 
almost  always,  when  convenient,  by  stamping  the 
foot  upon  their  heads  ;  the  spiteful  efforts  of  the 
latter  to  bite  the  foot  crushing  them  ;  the  conflict 
generally  ending,  with  rare  exceptions,  in  the  death 
of  the  latter.  Now  Ave  ask.  What  other  fact  could  be 
found  which  would  so  fully  and  so  impressively  sym- 
bolize the  great  and  fearful  conflict  between  Christ 
and  his  Church,  and  Satan  and  his  followers  ?  What 
other  metaphor  could  be  so  appropriate  ?  Now  when 
we  consider  that  all  ordinances,  like  circumcision,  are 
of  the  same  nature  with,  and  fill  offices  similar  to, 
those  filled  by  metaphors — both  of  them  simply  sensu- 
ous pictures  of  higher  truths — we  feel  justified  in 
looking  upon  the  one  here  used  to  symbolize  this  first 
great  covenant  of  God  with  men,  as  being,  in  fact, 
circumcision  in  another  form.  As  this  metaphor 
comes  from  one  of  the  most  universal  and  remarkable 
facts  known  to  men,  and  as  God  here  makes  use  of  it 
to  picture  all  the  truths  bound  up  in  the  promise  pic- 
tured,— all  the  great  truths  .of  the  glorious  work  of 
redemption  foretold, — it  must  be  confessed  to  be  one 
of  the  great  symbols  of  his  Church.  As  it  pictures 
all  the  covenants  wrapped  up  in  that  Avith  Adam,  it 
must  picture  the  Abrahamic,  as  that  is  one  of  those 
so  Avrapped  up,  as  Ave  have  seen.  As  a  symbol  pic- 
turing this  latter,  it  fills  the  same  office  with  circum- 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  Ill 

cision  in  that  Abrahamic  covenant,  and,  consequently, 
must  be  identical  with  that  rite.  To  our  minds  the 
identity  is  strikingly  evident. 

The  claim  that  God  designed  that  metaphor  as  a 
symbol  of  the  sacredness  and  surety  of  that  covenant 
with  Adam,  if  well  founded,  as  we  fully  believe  it  is, 
makes  it  a  seal  of  that  covenant,  and  so  gives  to  it, 
in  this  respect,  the  same  office  with  circumcision. 

Note  here  the  special  adaptation  of  its  form  to  the 
peculiar  circumstances  of  Adam  and  Eve.  Their  sad 
seduction  by  the  insidious  enchantments  of  Satan  has 
just  been  experienced.  In  view  of  this  most  disas- 
trous fact,  and  the  merciful  purposes  of  God  in  their 
favor  they  needed  to  have  pictured,  and  so  greatly 
emphasized  to  them,  the  long,  dreadful  conflict  in 
store  for  them  and  their  posterity,  occasioned  by  their 
transgression;  and,  also,  the  certain  victory  of  the 
believing  ones  among  them.  We  ask,  then,  what 
other  fact  could  have  been  found,  or  imagined,  better 
fitted  to  do  this  than  the  one  chosen  ? 

The  duty  was  enjoined  upon  Adam  and  Eve,  so  to 
consecrate  their  children,  so  to  nurture  and  train  them 
up  for  God,  with  his  promised  help,  so  to  take  fast 
hold  of,  and  cling  to,  his  covenant-promises,  that,  Avith 
rare  exceptions,  if  any,  they  would  all  be  regenerated 
in  early  childhood.  The  same  was  enjoined  upon 
every  one  of  their  descendants  in  all  the  ages  of  the 
future.  In  case  of  such  fidelity,  this  their  church- 
family  would  thus  have  soon  grown  into  a  great, 
patriarchal  church.  Colonies  would  have  left  it  from 
time  to  time  and  formed  other  like  churches  in 
other  places,  where  the}^  went  to  dwell ;    and  thus. 


112  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

at  length,  the  whole  world  would  have  been  filled 
with  such,  in  which  the  endearing  ties  of  kindred 
would  coincide,  largely,  with  the  infinitely  higher 
ones  of  spiritual  fellowship.  God  acted  upon  the 
supposition  that  they  and  their  seed  would  all  be  so 
faithful  to  these  obligations  imposed,  as  thus  to  secure 
a  posterity  made  up  almost,  if  not  quite,  wholly  of 
believers — Satan  baffled  in  every  one  of  his  greatest, 
most  persistent,  most  artful,  most  insidious  efforts 
possible  to  him,  to  prevent  it.  He.  did  not  give  them 
a  symbol  to  be  administered  to  their  persons,  to  dis- 
tinguish them  from  the  unbelieving  ones  around 
them,  for  the  reason  that  there  would  be  but  very 
few,  if  any,  of  that  class  to  make  such  a  distinguishing 
badge  necessary.  How  great  and  sad  their  failure  to 
come  up  to  the  divine  requisitions  and  thus  secure 
their  highest  possible  perfection  as  a  race,  the  dark 
records  of  history  too  painfully  show.  The  numbers 
refusing  obedience  and  abounding  in  Avickedness  in- 
creased more  and  more  as  the  centuries  rolled  by, 
until  at  length  the  earth  became  so  full  of  w^icked- 
ness  that  God  was  compelled  to  destroy  its  guilty 
inhabitants  with  a  flood ;  yet  sparing  one  family — 
the  only  faithful  oae — with  which  to  fulfil  his  cove- 
nant-promises made  to  his  well-beloved  Son. 

By  thus  removing  the  great  multitudes  of  the 
wicked  antediluvians  from  his  few  faithful  believers, 
God  gave  its  first  marked  development  to  that  prin- 
ciple of  separation  of  the  believing  from  the  unbe- 
lieving, which  should  be  maintained  by  his  Church. 
It  was  a  striking  prophecy  of  that  which  is  so  much 
emphasized  in  Christian  churches.     But  during   all 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  113 

this  age  of  degeneracy,  there  was  kept  unbroken  a 
narrow  line  of  believing  families  which  constituted 
the  true  Church — a  line  made  up  of  those  saintly 
ones  who,  like  Enoch,  walked  with  God  and,  at  the 
close  of  life,  were  not  for  God  took  them. 

III.  The  Noachian  Churchy  Its  Covenant,  and  Its 
Covenant  Symbol. — By  the  destruction  and  expulsion 
from  his  Church  of  these  wicked  antediluvians,  God,  as 
we  have  seen,  drew  a  broad  line  of  separation  between 
its  believing  and  its  unbelieving  ones.  He  thus 
prepared  the  way  for,  and,  through  the  few  faithful 
ones  spared,  introduced,  a  great  reformation  in  the 
persons  of  Noah  and  his  believing  family,  and  we 
think  we  find  this  same  historic  Church,  with  this 
same  covenant  and  symbol,  in  other  forms,  in  the  time 
of  Noah,  and  in  all  the  remaining  pre-Abrahamic  age 
succeeding'  him. 

(1)  Noah  and  his  children  showed  themselves  true 
believers  by  preparing  the  ark  and  shutting  them- 
selves up  in  it  at  God's  command.  They  had  united 
worship  in  their  sacrifices.  They,  also,  had  in  those 
sacrifices,  holy  sacraments  pointing  to  Christ.  These 
characteristics,  together  with  the  many  others  implied, 
fully  meet  the  true  definition  of  a  church.^ 

(2)  Being  believers,  they  were  necessarily  in  cov- 
enant with  God  and  each  other.  In  their  covenant, 
as  declared  in  Gen.  9 : 1-17,  we  clearly  discern  the 
Abrahamic.  The  whole  of  the  latter,  as  we  have 
before  shown,  is  involved  in  the  command :  "  Be 
fruitful,  and  multiply  and  replenish  the  earth."  This, 
like  the   same  to  Adam,  involved  the  obligation  to 

1  See  pages  89,  90. 
9 


114  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

fill,  with  God's  help,  the  earth  with  a  believing  pos- 
terity, and  the  faithful  use  of  all  the  means  necessary 
to  meet  it,  so  far  as  possible, — just  the  same  as  those 
involved  by  the  Abrahamic  covenant.  It,  also,  in- 
volved the  promise,  by  God,  of  all  needed  help  and 
of  success  always  corresponding  to  their  fidelit}^ — 
just  like  the  Abrahamic  covenant.  In  God's  pledge 
not  again  to  destroy  the  earth  with  a  flood,  is  involved, 
and  dimly  expressed,  the  promise  of  redemption 
through  Christ.  His  great  object  in  thus  sparing 
them  would  and  could  have  been  no  other  than  to 
make  them,  if  possible,  partakers  of  his  promised  and 
provided  salvation.  In  like  manner  each  clause  of 
the  former  (Noachian)  covenant  may  be  shown  to 
involve  the  substance  of  the  latter. 

(3)  God  gave  Noah  a  symbol  and  a  seal  of  this 
covenant,  the  bow  in  the  cloud.  As  that  is  a  wel- 
come harbinger  of  returning  sunshine,  it  was  a  very 
appropriate  one  in  their  circumstances.  When  God, 
after  giving  him  his  covenant-promise,  said  to  Noah  : 
This  is  a  token  of  the  covenant  which  I  make  between 
me  and  you,  and  every  living  creature  ^  that  is  with 
you,  for  perpetual  generations  :  I  do  set  my  bow  in 
the  cloud,  and  it  shall  be  for  a  token  of  a  covenant 
between  me  and  the  earth,  etc.,  he  virtually  said  : 
When  that  bow  shall  no  more  be  seen  in  the  cloud, 
then,  and  not  till  then,  shall  this  covenant-promise  of 
mine  fail  of  its   fulfilment — in  other  words.  It  shall 

1  God  cannot,  of  course,  enter  into  covenant  with,  nor  make  any 
promises  to,  irrational  creatures;  but  he  can,  and  does,  enter  into  cov- 
enant with,  and  make  promises  to,  his  chosen  ones  respecting  them. 
In  this  sense,  he  made  his  covenant  not  only  with  Noah,  but,  also,  every 
living  creature  that  was  with  him. 


SCRIPTURAL  ARGUMENT.  115 

never  fail.  He  thus  made  its  seal-character  most 
prominent.  As  this  Noachian  covenant  thus  involved 
all  the  truths  of  redemption,  this  its  symbol  pictures 
the  same  truths  with  circumcision  and,  hence,  we  can 
but  recognize  the  two  as  different  forms  of  the  same 
substance,  and  so  perfectly  identical. 

This  symbol  also  emphasizes  the  promise  that  the 
period  of  the  earth's  probation  shall  not  be  brought 
to  a  close  by  deserved  judgments,  until  all  that  can 
be,  has  been,  done,  to  get  from  the  human  race  as 
many  for  God's  chosen  ones  as  possible. 

As  God  gave  this  covenant  to  believing  Noah  and 
his  believing  seed,  as  the  only  inhabitants  of  the,  to 
them,  known  world;  as,  in  giving  it  to  them,  he 
imposed  the  obligation  that  all  of  them  should  be 
believers  and  their  children  made  heirs  of  covenant- 
promises  ;  and  as  he  gave  it  on  the  trial-supposition 
that  such  would,  with  rare  exceptions,  be  the  case, 
he  did  not  give  them  a  symbol  to  be  administered 
to  their  persons,  thus  to  distinguish  themselves  as 
believers  and  their  children  as  covenant-children, 
from  unbelieving  ones  and  their  non-covenant- 
children.  He  did  not  do  this,  for  the  good  reason 
that  there  could  be  none  such  outside  of  the  descend- 
ants of  Noah,  and  it  was  taken  for  granted  that 
because  of  their  fidelity  there  would  be  but  few,  if 
any,  inside  of  them. 

At  the  same  time,  the  duty  was,  by  implication 
laid  upon  them  and  their  descendants,  to  distinguish 
carefully  in  their  minds  between  those  who  actually 
did  become  believers  and  those  who  did  not. 

In  our  search,  now  completed,  for  these  Abrahamic 


116  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

institutions  in  those  earliest  ages  of  church-history, 
we  have,  as  we  expected,  found  them  largely  in  rudi- 
mentary stages  of  development.  Owing  to  the  ex- 
ceeding meagreness  of  Scripture  records,  we  could 
obtain  only  slight  glimpses  of  them  at  best;  and, 
owing  to  this  their  state  of  infancy,  we  have  found 
more  or  less  of  immaturity  in  what  we  did  discover. 
But  as  the  lordly  river  is  found  in  its  bubbling 
fountain-spring,  so  we  detect  these  institutions  in  all 
their  coming  perfection  of  organization,  in  these  so 
very  incomplete  ones  of  those  ancient  days. 

We  find  like  differences  of  maturity  in  the  history 
of  sacrifices,  stretching  from  Eden  down  to  Calvary. 
We  certainly  find  the  latter,  as  offered  in  acceptable 
worship,  reaching  far  back  to  the  family  of  Adam; 
but  we  do  not  find  them  there  in  that  perfected  state 
of  organization,  as,  in  later  ages,  in  the  Mosaic 
ritual ;  yet  the  later  are  confessedly  seen  in  the 
former,  as  tlie  fountain-head  of  the  one  historic 
stream.  These  church  institutions,  found  in  the  first 
human  family,  and  again  in  that  of  Noah,  assure  us 
that  they  are  the  out-croppings  of  a  narrow,  yet 
unbroken  vein  of  divinely-organized  family  churches, 
stretching  from  one  to  the  other,  in  godly  believers 
like  the  saintly  Enoch — their  divine  organization 
inhering  in  their  very  nature  as  families.  For  like 
reasons,  we  feel  assured  that  the  same  reaches  down, 
without  a  gap,  to  the  time  of  Abraham. 

The  Germ-seeds  of  all  Religious  Ordmanees. — 
In  this  connection,  it  may  be  noted  that  all  religious 
ordinances  have  their  origin,  under  God,  in  those 
simple,  spontaneous    services  which  had  previously 


SCRIPTURAL    ARGUMENT.  117 

and  naturally  come  into  use  in  the  experiences  of 
believers.  Divinely-authorized  and  enjoined  animal 
sacrifices,  for  instance,  evidently  originated  in  the 
fact  that  godly  men  of  old  instinctively  saw  in  their 
customary  slaying  of  animals  for  hospitable  enter- 
tainment of  their  distinguished  guests,  symbols  of 
the  worship  they  rendered  their  divine  Guest.  They 
also  naturally  saw  in  the  animals  slain  symbols  of 
themselves  as  guilty  sinners  deserving  to  be  morally 
slain ;  in  the  death  of  the  same,  their  own  death  to 
sin ;  in  such  sacrifices  of  their  property,  the  duty  of 
offering  themselves  and  all  their  possessions  in  sacri- 
fice to  their  God.  These  natural,  spontaneous  ser- 
vices are  found  in  tlie  Mosaic  ritual,  so  shaped  in 
their  forms  as  to  conform  to  certain  prescribed  and 
necessary  conditions  of  times,  places,  and  methods ; 
thus  securing  needed  uniformity  and  greater  solem- 
nity of  service. 

The  broken  bread  and  the  cup  of  ordinary  family 
meals  are,  in  themselves,  fitting  emblems  of  the 
broken  body  and  flowing  blood  of  the  crucified  One. 
They  would,  or  should,  be  so  regarded,  even  if  they 
had  not  been  set  apart  as  such  by  the  blessed  Saviour 
in  the  sacramental  ordinance  he  instituted ;  and  the 
devout  believer  now  sees  the  same  affecting  truths 
in  many  other  familiar  objects ;  and  worships, 
through  them,  just  as  truly  and  acceptably  as 
through  the  consecrated  emblems  of  his  Lord's 
Supper.  How  often  is  he  reminded  of  the  cruci- 
fixion on  Calvary  by  the  many  objects  which  meet 
his  eye  in  his  daily  walks  and  labors — such  as  a 
broken  tree-branch  or  twig,  a  cleft  rock,  a  crushed 


118  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

pebble,  a  rippling  rill,  drops  of  rain  trickling  down 
from  the  drooping  branches,  and  moistening  the 
ground  as  did  the  precious  blood  of  his  expiring 
Redeemer !  All  nature  was  thus  used  by  the  Saviour 
to  picture  and  impress  holy  things.  He  saw  emblems 
of  spiritual  truth  everywhere  around  him,  and, 
through  them,  rendered  most  acceptable  worship  to 
his  Father  in  heaven ;  as  witness  his  parables  and 
other  charming  illustrations,  drawn  from  the  scenes 
of  his  every-day  life.  Now  so  far  as  we,  his  disciples, 
with  a  like  wisdom  and  spirit,  see  his  broken  and 
bleeding  hands,  feet,  and  side,  in  any  object  of  sense, 
and,  through  them,  devoutly  contemplate  the  sacred 
things,  thus  symbolized,  we  render  substantially  the 
same  worship  as  at  the  table  of  our  ever-blessed 
Lord. 

Circumcision,  as  a  necessary  means  of  cleanliness 
in  warm  climates,  was  practised  in  Oriental  coun- 
tries long  before  Abraham.  Because  adapted  to 
such  a  use,  it  at  the  same  time  impressively  symbol- 
ized moral  cleansing,  and  was  especially  fitted  to 
symbolize  that  cleanness  from  all  the  low,  debasing 
lusts  of  the  flesh  which  characterizes  all  God's  true 
people.  Hence  all  who  practised  it,  Hebrews  or 
others,  saw,  or  should  have  seen,  this  its  higher 
spiritual  import.  All  the  devout  ones  who  did  see 
and  keep  this  in  mind  in  their  circumcisions  offered 
the  same  acceptable  worship  with  the  pious  Jews 
who  afterwards  practised  it  as  a  divinely-appointed 
ordinance. 

The  sprinkling  of  water  upon  a  man,  even  by  acci- 
dent,   naturally   pictures    the    divine    imparting   of 


SCKIPTUEAL   ARGUMENT.  119 

moral  cleansing,  and  also  pictured  the  act  of  being 
thus  cleansed,  if  conscious  of  having  had  that  experi- 
ence ;  pouring  it  upon  him,  the  pouring  of  God's 
spirit  upon  him ;  immersion  into  and  emersion  from 
it,  burial  with  Christ  unto  death  and  resurrection 
with  him  into  newness  of  life.  Each  one  of  these 
would  symbolize  the  same  had  no  ordinance  of  bap- 
tism been  instituted  by  Christ.  The  thoughtful 
believer,  therefore,  who  devoutly  sees  the  same 
truths  of  baptism  pictured  to  him  whenever,  in  his 
ordinary  experience,  he  has  water  sprinkled  upon 
him,  or,  intentionally  or  by  chance,  is  immersed 
into  and  rises  up  out  of  it,  is  baptized  in  the  same 
sense  as  when  receiving  in  an  orderly  way  the  insti- 
tuted rite  itself.  It  does  not  follow,  however,  that 
believers,  of  themselves  alone,  would  have  been  jus- 
tified in  instituting  such  a  rite  as  a  church  ordinance. 
To  do  that  is  the  prerogative  of  God  himself. 

This  substantial  identity  of  all  Scriptural  ordi- 
nances, with  like  human  experiences  in  every-day 
life,  does  not  detract  in  the  least  from  their  large 
importance  and  necessity.  It  rather  greatly  empha- 
sizes and  enhances  it.  It  by  no  means  gives  the 
liberty  nor  the  slightest  excuse  for  neglecting  them. 
Their  object  as  instituted  ordinances  is  to  secure 
the  more  faithful  and  more  impressive  observance 
of  what  would  otherwise  be  largely  neglected  and 
lightly  esteemed.  This  identity  of  every-day  experi- 
ences with  all  divine  ordinances,  as  their  fountain 
source  under  God,  furnishes  striking  corroborative 
proof  of  the  claim  we  make,  that  the  Abrahamic  are 
found  in  other  forms  in  the  earliest  ages. 


120  ,      INFANT    BAPTISM. 

A  Caution  Reiterated. — In  closing,  we  would 
reiterate  with  emphasis  the  caution  made  and  em- 
phasized when  we  commenced  this  search  for  them 
in  the  records  of  those  ancient  times,  against  regard- 
ing as  essential  to  this  Scriptural  Argument  the 
validity  of  the  claim  here  made,  viz. :  That  such 
corresponding  local  and  temporal  forms  are  there 
found.  The  existence  in  that  age  of  the  essential 
features  of  the  Abrahamic  is,  indeed,  essential,  but 
not  any  corresponding  unessential  forms.  If  the 
latter  are  not  found,  it  only  shows  that  the  former 
had  not  by  growth  attained  unto  such  an  embodi- 
ment. But  these  unessential  corresponding  ones 
not  being  there  would  be  no  evidence  that  such 
are  not  in  the  Christian  age.  The  absence  of  fruit 
in  a  year-old  sprout  is  no  evidence  that  it  will  be 
wanting  when  it  becomes  of  a  fruit-bearing  age.  It 
would  be  most  probable  that  what  was  non-embodied 
in  the  earliest  age,  but  was  embodied  by  growth  in 
the  Abrahamic,  would  by  a  like  growth  be  embodied 
in  the  Christian.  The  existence  of  such  forms  in 
those  primitive  times — now  proved,  as  we  claim — 
does,  indeed,  give  much  strength  to  our  argument,  by 
reason  oi  the  great  increase  of  probability  it  affords 
of  finding  corresponding  ones  in  the  Christian  age. 
As  they  are  found  not  only  in  the  Abrahamic,  but 
also  in  the  pre-Abrahamic,  age,  it  can  be  but  little 
short  of  morally  certain  that  they  are  in  the  Chris- 
tian. For  this  reason  their  non-existence  in  the 
times  of  Adam  and  Noah  would  be  a  great,  though 
not  a  fatal,  loss  to  the  argument. 

The  claim  made  by  some  scholars  that  Adam  and 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  121 

Noah  were  not  historic,  but  simply  mythical,  persons, 
does  not  seriously  affect  this  argument.  In  that 
case  their  churches  would  also  be  mythical,  but 
they  would  set  forth  the  essential  truths  of  the 
Abrahamic  church,  covenant,  etc.,  all  the  same. 
Being  in  harmony  with,  and  illustrative  of,  the  latter, 
they  would  teach  the  same  truths  just  as  really  as 
do  the  later  historic  facts  themselves.  Fiction  is  a 
much-used  and  a  very  effective  means  of  teaching 
and  impressing  truth. 

While  our  efforts  in  this  chapter  to  find  such  cor- 
responding forms  in  that  age  were  not  called  for  by 
the  necessities  of  the  Argument  for  Infant  Baptism, 
and  our  success  was  not  essential  to  its  validity,  we 
yet  feel  sure  that  what  we  have  done  will  greatly 
gratify  our  readers  so  far  as  they  take  pleasure  in 
the  exhaustive  treatment  of  important  subjects. 
We  are  confident  that  it  will  be  especially  pleasing 
to  those  who  highly  appreciate  and  delight  in  gen- 
eralizations as  a  grand  and  a  most  pleasing  agency, 
with  scientific  minds,  in  all  their  successful  investi- 
gations. 

Oneness  of  law  in  numberless  variety  of  phenom- 
ena is  the  great  charm  of  the  pliysical  universe  to 
an  intelligent  seeker  after  its  hidden  truths.  The 
greater  the  variety,  the  sharper  the  contrast ;  the 
larger  the  apparent  contradictions,  the  more  attrac- 
tive and  fascinating  the  harmony  when  discovered. 
The  same  is  true  in  all  departments  of  knowledge. 


CHAPTER  VIIT. 

Part  Fourth. 

The  Abeahamic  Church  :  Its  Covenant  and  its  Symbol, 
Circumcision,  as  found  in  the  Abrahamic  Age. 

Our  purpose  in  this  part  is  not  to  prove  the  exist- 
ence of  these  institutions  in  that  age,  as  that  is  self- 
evident  ;  but,  mainly,  to  give  in  brief  their  history. 

The  church  reformation,  introduced  through  Noah 
and  his  family,  proved  itself  a  lamentable  and  well- 
nigh  total  failure.  Apostasy  soon  set  in,  and  its 
continued  workings  were  so  disastrous  that  in  a  few 
centuries  faith  seemed  to  have  nearly  died  out  from 
the  earth.  This  made  an  imperative  demand  for 
another,  which  should  introduce  a  better  epoch. 
The  history  of  the  Church  in  all  ages  shows  that 
her  progress  is  marked  by  periods  of  alternate  reform 
and  decline.  First,  a  high  degree  of  piety  and  zeal 
on  the  part  of  a  few,  raised  up  by  God  to  introduce 
a  new  and  better  era,  resulting  in  a  widespread 
reformation,  giving  promise  of  a  permanent  and  an 
ever-increasing  one ;  then,  sooner  or  later,  a  gradual 
decline,  sometimes  covering  ages,  until  degeneracy 
seems  well-nigh  universal ;  then  another  reformation 
followed  by  another  decline,  and  so  on.  The  pure, 
plump  seed,  greatly  and  happily  prolific  at  first,  by 
and  by,  for  the  want  of  proper  cultivation  and 
because  of  the  stealthy  sowing  of  the  tares  by  the 
enemy,  begins  to  deteriorate  in  the  quantity  and 
quality  of  the  yields,  and  keeps   on  so  doing  until 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  123 

the  harvests  are  scarcely  worth  the  gathering  ;  then, 
by  the  shifting  process  of  a  holy  God,  the  generally 
depreciated  seed  is  so  winnowed  and  assorted  that 
only  a  few  choice  kernels,  their  ancestral  vitality 
providentially  preserved,  remain.  With  them  comes 
a  new,  more  careful  and  more  successful  sowing  and 
cultivation  ;  and  so  the  epochs,  commencing  in  reform 
and  ending  in  decline,  slowly  succeed  one  another, 
each  one  leaving  the  world  better  than  before. 

This  speedy  and  disastrous  decline  in  the  reforma- 
tion introduced  by  Noah  made  evident  the  necessity 
of  another  reformer  of  such  preeminent  character,  as 
a  believer,  as  should  make  him  a  bright  and  shining 
light  to  all  future  ages,  and  so  most  influential  and 
powerful  as  a  leader  in  the  needed  reformation.  It 
also  made  evident  the  need  of  one  of  such  heroic 
fidelity  in  complying  with  the  conditions  of  God's 
covenant  that  his  seed  would  start  off  with  and  ever 
maintain  the  same  preeminence  of  character  and 
the  same  fidelity  in  obedience,  thus  giving  assur- 
ance of  securing  the  complete  fulfilment  of  God's 
covenant-promises  respecting  them,  as  a  believing 
seed  destined  to  become  as  numerous  as  the  sands 
upon  the  seashore.  For  the  purpose  of  obtaining 
such  a  reformer,  God  took  believing  Abraham  and 
subjected  him  to  a  long  and  rigorous  training.  He 
called  him  out  from  his  kindred  and  native  land, 
gave  him  his  holy  commandments,  made  gracious 
promises  to  him,  favored  him  with  personal  inter- 
views, made  him  his  confidant,  manifested  his  loving 
presence  to  him  in  a  smoking  furnace.  He  put  his 
faith  to  the  severest  test  by  demanding  the  sacrifice 


124  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

of  his  well-beloved  son,  Isaac,  reaffirmed  his  Adamic 
and  Noachian  covenant  with  him  respecting  himself 
and  his  seed,  and  gave  him  the  rite  of  circum- 
cision as  a  new  symbol  and  seal  of  the  covenant. 
He  thus  made  him,  indeed,  the  great  human  light 
of  history,  the  acknowledged  father  of  all  believers, 
one  whose  holy  influence  has  come  down  to  us,  mani- 
festing itself  in  all  the  intervening  ages  with  a  con- 
stantly-increasing power,  never  before  so  great  as  now. 
In  this  reformation  previous  methods  were  changed 
in  this  important  respect :  The  apostate  inhabitants 
were  not  destroyed ;  the  known  earth  was  not  thus 
left  the  sole  possession  of  the  reformer  and  his  natu- 
ral descendants ;  but  the  latter  were  called  to  live 
and  maintain  themselves  as  God's  peculiar  people  in 
a  world  filled  with  wicked  men.  They  were  thus  so 
placed  as  lights  and  leavening  forces  that  the  first 
incipient  steps  of  the  future  world-wide  missionary 
work,  stretching  down  the  ages,  might  be  taken  by 
them.  At  the  same  time,  for  the  purpose  of  their 
self-preservation  from  the  contaminating  and  fatally- 
destructive  vices  of  the  wicked  around  them,  and  as 
helpful  to  their  own  spiritual  development,  there 
were  enjoined  upon  them  certain  distinctive  rites, 
ceremonies,  and  laws,  calculated  to  keep  them, 
especially  their  children,  so  separate  as  to  receive 
no  stain  from  their  corrupting  neighbors,  and,  at  the 
same  time,  make  themselves  a  better  recognized  and 
and  a  more  impressive  object-lesson  to  them.  For 
the  purpose  of  making  this  separation  as  effective  as 
possible,  the  distinguishing  badge  given  them  was 
administered  to  their  persons. 


,  SCRIPTURAL  ARGUMENT.  125 

Abraham  and  his  believing  seed,  thus  taken  into 
covenant  with  God  as  his  peculiar  people  and  desig- 
nated as  such  by  their  circumcision,  constituted  the 
Abrahamic  Church  with  its  covenant  and  symbol. 

Their  History  in  that  Age. — The  history  of  that 
church,  covering  a  period  of  nearly  two  thousand 
years,  though  marred  with  many  blemishes,  is  yet  a 
great  improvement  upon  the  Adamic  and  Noachian. 
In  some  parts  of  her  career  it  was,  indeed,  glorious. 
As  the  daugliter  of  God's  people  she  was  at  times, 
owing  to  her  willingness  to  receive  such  blessings, 
honored  and  tenderly  cared  for  by  her  covenant- 
keeping  God.  She  received  the  law  from  Mt.  Sinai 
and  transmitted  it  to  the  Christian  church ;  gave  the 
world  a  model  civil  government  and  code,  also  an 
invaluable  literature  of  history,  poetry,  holy  pre- 
cepts, and  divine  prophecy.  She  raised  up  godly 
prophets  and  kings  whose  names  are  the  richest 
treasure  of  the  church  of  all  ages.  She  had  the 
high  calling  of  giving,  under  God,  the  world  its 
divine  Saviour.  Her  exalted  privileges  and  price- 
less heritage,  as  the  chosen  people  of  God,  are 
graphically  set  forth  by  the  Apostle  Paul  thus : 
"  Who  are  Israelites ;  to  whom  pertaineth  the  adop- 
tion, and  the  glory,  and  the  covenants,  and  the  giv- 
ing of  the  law,  and  the  service  and  the  promises ; 
whose  are  the  fathers,  and  of  whom,  as  concerning 
the  flesh,  Christ  came  wdio  is  over  all,  God  blessed 
forever.     Amen." 

But,  sad  to  say,  degeneracy  at  length  invaded  even 
this  so  highly-favored,  and,  for  a  time,  greatly-pros- 
pered church  ;  and  kept  on  in  its  deadly  work,  uatil 


126  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

only  a  small  remnant  of  her  enrolled  membership  re- 
mained faithful.  In  their  apostasy  they,  more  and 
more,  set  up  their  vain  traditions  above  God's  word  ; 
lost  sight  of  the  high  spiritual  character  of  their 
splendid  ritual ;  perverted  it  to  a  galling  yoke  of 
bondage  ;  and  made  it  minister  to  their  sinful  pride 
and  hardness  of  heart.  They  made  themselves,  by 
their  sins,  the  victims  of  wicked  rulers,  both  home 
and  foreign,  and,  worst  of  all,  stoned  the  prophets 
sent  unto  them,  for  no  other  reason  than  that  they 
told  them  God's  truth.  A  sad  ending  it,  indeed,  was 
of  a  history  which  commenced  with  so  much  of 
promise,  and  was  so  glorious  in  some  of  its  ages. 

A  Larger  Development  of  the  Prhicij^le  of  Separa- 
tion.— In  this  Abrahamic  Cliurch  now  under  examina- 
tion we  find  that  grand  church-principle  of  separation 
between  God's  believing  children — as  alone  his 
church — and  all  non-believing  ones,  more  fully  devel- 
oped than  in  the  Adamic  and  Noachian.  That 
Church  was  inaugurated  by  calling  Abraham  and  his 
famil}^  out  from  Ur  of  the  Chaldees ;  and  thus  sepa- 
rating them  from  their  idolatrous  and  influential  kin- 
dred and  neighbors.  God,  also,  gave  them  a  badge 
administered  to  their  persons,  and  a  ritual,  to 
keep  them  separate  from  the  no  less  idola- 
trous, yet  less  influential,  inhabitants  of  Canaan 
among  whom  he  located  them.  He  early  brought 
about  a  separation  between  ^the  descendants  of 
Abraham  and  those  of  his  nephew,  Lot ;  because  the 
latter  pitched  his  tent  toward  Sodom,  and  his  poster- 
ity were  unbelieving.  He  next  drew  a  line  of 
separation  in  the  house  of  the   patriarch  himself,  by 


SCRIPTURAL  ARGUMENT.  127 

cutting  off,  because  of  their  apostasy,  his  descendants 
through  Ishmael  and  Keturah.  They  received  cir- 
cumcision in  form  and  would  have  been  children  of 
the  covenant,  equally  with  those  of  Isaac,  had  they 
not  refused  compliance  with  its  conditions,  in  their 
wicked  unbelief.  Afterwards  he  drew  a  dividing  line 
in  the  house  of  Isaac,  of  whom  it  was  predicted: 
*'In  Isaac  shall  thy  seed  be  called."  Because  of  their 
unbelief,  he  cut  off  from  his  covenant  Esau  and  his 
seed.  Again,  he  incorporated  a  law  in  their  church 
code,  providing  for  the  cutting  off  from  Israel  all 
guilty  of  certain  crimes. 

In  the  use  of  these  disciplinary  measures,  God  went 
as  far  as  he  wisely  could  in  the  direction  of  making 
his  Church  perfectly  pure,  hindered,  as  he  was,  by 
the  great  imperfections  of  the  true  believers  in  it. 
He  could  not  wisely  go  farther,  because  of  the  want 
of  a  more  controlling  disposition,  on  their  part,  to 
seek  his  help  and  follow  his  guidance  with  all  their 
hearts.  Had  they  been  of  a  more  teachable  spirit, 
and  more  fully  disposed  to  do  his  will,  as  revealed  to 
them,  they  would,  under  the  leadings  of  his  Spirit, 
have  carried  this  separation  very  much  farther,  both 
in  not  receiving  into,  and  removing  from,  their  church 
all  destitute  of  faith.  But,  owing  to  these,  their 
great  imperfections,  such  a  high  degree  of  the  develop- 
ment of  this  principle  could  not  wisely  be  secured, 
until  the  time  for  its  fuller  development  in  the  Chris- 
tian age  should  come.  This  was  the  ear — a  great 
advance  upon  the  preceding  blade — but  not  the  full 
corn  in  the  ear. 


CHAPTER   IX. 

Part  Fifth. 

The  Abkahamic  Institutions  as  Found  in  the  Cheistian 
Age  in  Cokkesponding  Christian  Foems — The  Chris- 
tian Chuech,  its  Covenant,  and  its  SxMBoii — Cheis- 
tian Baptism. 

A  degeneracy  so  great  and  widespread,  following 
an  earlier  career  of  so  much  of  success  and  of  expe- 
riences, many  of  them  so  happy,  showed  the  necessity 
of  a  reformation  of  a  much  higher  type,  and  of  a  re- 
former, greater  and  better  than  man,  to  introduce  and 
make  it  effectual ;  hence  God,  in  mercy  and  in  fulfil- 
ment of  his  gracious  covenant-promises,  sent  his  equal 
Son,  the  Reformer  of  all  reformers,  to  introduce, 
carry  on,  and  consummate  the  greatest  of  all  reforma- 
tions. He  came,  as  sent,  not  only  as  a  divine  teacher 
and  exampler,  but,  also,  as  an  almighty  Saviour ;  hav- 
ing power  to  remit  sin,  cleanse  from  its  deadly,  loath- 
some pollution,  and  impart  spiritual  life.  He  was 
preceded,  as  foretold  in  Scripture,  by  John  the  Baptist, 
preaching  repentance  and  works  of  righteousness,  in 
preparation  for  his  immediate  advent.  He  came 
Avith  his  ax  for  the  roots  of  every  tree  bearing 
noxious  fruit ;  with  winnowing  fan,  and  with  chaff- 
consuming  fire.  He  thus  cut  off  from  the  visible 
and  greatly-adultered  Peculiar  People,  all  spurious 
members  and  gathered,  from  the  few  genuine  ones 
remaining,  a  little  company  of  believing  disciples. 


SCRIPT  tin  AL   ARGUMENT.  129 

This  little  band,  together  with  the  few  other  like 
ones  remaining,  was  the  true  Abrahamic  Church — its 
entire  membership.  As  prophecy,  and  subsequent  his- 
tory show,  it  was  the  rescued  seed-grain  of  the  great 
world-wide  harvests  of  all  future  ages.  Like  Christ 
himself,  it  was  the  rod  shooting  out  of  the  stem  of 
Jesse,  the  tiny  branch  out  of  his  roots,  which  was  to 
grow  into  a  tree  of  inconceivable  magnitude ;  a  little 
torn  vine  in  the  long-neglected  vineyard,  which  the 
boars  out  of  the  woods  had  happened  not  fatally  to 
waste,  and  the  wild  beasts  of  the  field,  not  completely 
to  devour ;  which  was  to  take  root  and  grow  to  fill 
the  world;  covering  the  hills  with  its  shadows;  her 
boughs  like  those  of  the  goodly  cedars ;  sending 
them  unto  every  sea  and  her  branches  to  every  river. 
It  was  the  diminutive  rill  of  Ezekiel,  issuing  from 
under  the  threshold  of  the  temple,  destined  to  flow 
down  the  ages  to  the  end  of  time,  with  ever-increas- 
ing volume,  clothing  its  broad  intervals  with  living 
verdure,  blushing  flowers,  and  majestic  trees,  and 
healing  the  putrid  waters  of  the  Dead  Sea  of  fallen 
humanity. 

With  this  history  in  view,  to  be  wrought  out  by 
himself,  the  Saviour  took  this  little  company  of  the 
true  sons  of  Abraham  under  his  instruction  and  nur- 
ture, to  prepare  them  for  their  grand  mission.  He 
rebound  them  in  covenant  to  himself  and  each 
other — bonds  before  resting  upon  them,  in  all  their 
obligations  and  absolutely  essential  to  their  real 
membership  in  that  Church  ;  gave  them  the  rite  of 
baptism  and  th'e  ordinance  of  his  Supper — new  forms 
of  the  Abrahamic  rite  and  of  the  paschal  ordinance, — 
10 


130  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

made  to  them  new  and  higher  revelations  of  his  will 
— new  in  form,  not  in  substance ;  and  commissioned 
them  to  go  into  all  the  world  and  preach  his  gospel 
to  every  creature.  In  fulfilment  of  his  divine  mis- 
sion, he  died  upon  an  ignominious  cross,  was  buried 
and  rose  again  from  his  tomb,  triumphant  over  death 
and  the  grave,  and  reascended  to  his  Father  in  heaven. 

At  the  next  Pentecostal  feast,  following  his  ascen- 
sion, he  bestowed  his  promised  gift,  the  Holy  Spirit, 
upon  his  pra3dng  disciples,  and  thus  fully  equipped 
them  for  their  great  and  glorious  mission,  the 
conquest  of  tlie  world  for  himself.  In  this  little 
community  of  believers,  gathered  by  Christ  and 
anointed  with  power  from  on  high,  by  his  Pentecostal 
Spirit,  we  have,  as  confessed  by  all,  a  church  of  God, 
a  church-covenant  between  God  and  this  community, 
and  a  symbol  and  seal  of  this  covenant,  in  Chris- 
tian baptism.  Are  these  (this  church,  covenant,  sym-\ 
bol  and  seal)  the  same,  in  their  essential  features, 
as  the  Abrahamic  ?  Do  all  their  Biblical  and  histor- 
ical definitions  show  them  identical,  respectively,  with 
those  more  ancient  ones?  This  is  the  great  question 
before  us  in  this  part  of  our  Scriptural  argument 
upon  which  we  have  now  entered. 

The  historic  river  of  God's  people,  in  its  flow  from 
Eden  down  the  ages,  took  on  different  names,  appro- 
priate to  its  different  circumstances.  It  appropriately 
took  the  name  of  its  great  reformer,  Abraham,  at  his 
advent.  It  far  more  appropriately  took  the  name  of 
its  divine  reformer,  Christ  (the  Christian  Church), 
at  his  advent. 

When   we    gave,    in    Part   II,    the    definitions    of 


SCRIPTURAL    ARGUMENT.  131 

these  Abrahamic  institutions,  we  requested  the  reader 
to  keep  them  carefully  in  memory,  as  they  would  be 
needed  for  future  use.  We  have  now  arrived  at  the 
suggested  point  where  their  memory  is  especially 
needed.  We  are  now  to  give  the  definitions  of  the 
Christian,  as  we  then  did  those  of  the  other,  and  at- 
tempt to  show  the  identity  of  the  two  institutions  by 
placing  the  definitions  of  the  Christian,  side  by  side, 
respectively,  with  those  of  the  Abrahamic.  Hence 
the  necessity  of  a  full  and  correct  memory  of  the 
latter.  We  will  thus  consider  first  the  Christian 
Church. 

I.  The  Christian  Church  Defined,  and,  by 
ITS  definition,  shown  to  be,  literally,  an- 
other FORM  OF  THE  Abrahamic— We  will  take 
for  a  general  definition  of  a  Christian  church  that 
given  by  Prof.  A.  Hovey,  D.  D.,  in  an  article  of 
his  in  advocacy  of  Close  Communion,  published 
in  Bih.  Sacra^  xix,  p.  133,  viz.,  "A  community  of 
baptized  believers,  under  common  instruction  and 
united  in  worship."  We  do  not,  of  course,  accept 
his  well-known  interpretation  of  the  phrase  baptized 
believers,  as  including  only  those  immersed.  We 
use  it  as  also  including  those  who  claim  to  liave 
been  scripturally  bajDtized  by  other  modes.  This, 
his  definition  as  thus  modified,  we  accept  as  a  true, 
and  as  an  excellent,  one  ;  and  we  promise  to  show 
that  it  includes  just  those  definitions  of  the  Abra- 
hamic Church  which  have  been  given  by  us.  We 
claim  that  it  has  the  latter  all  wrapped  up  in  it,  as 
essential  parts  of  itself ;  that  it  necessarily  involves 
every  one  of  them  and  no  others. 


132  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

That  general,  comprehensive  definition  involves, 
and  cannot  but  involve,  the  following  more  specifics 
ones  : 

1.  A  community  of,  and  only  of,  believers. 

2.  An  organized  community. 

3.  Its  members  in  covenant  with  God,  in  behalf  of 
themselves,  their  children  and  all  their  other  interests. 
As  God  is  their  Shepherd  this  must  be  so.  To  sup- 
pose it  not  true  of  his  believing  ones  is  to  deny  that 
they  are  such.  These  essential  features  of  it,  are,  as 
has  been  shown,  identical  with  those  of  the  Abrahamic 
and  are  necessarily  included  in  all  covenants  between 
God  and  believers. 

4.  In  covenant  with  each  other.  This  is  absolutely 
essential  to  a  true  brotherhood,  especially  to  such  a 
loving  one  as  a  church  of  God  should  be. 

5.  They  have  inspired  Scriptures,  and,  in  some  in- 
stances, personal  revelations  from  God — the  apostolic 
churches — for  their  declaration  of  faith. 

6.  They  are  under  common  instruction,  with  united 
worship  and  work. 

7.  They  give  their  children  covenant  nurture. 
Only  by  so  doing  can  they  be  faithful  believers.  This 
definition  involves  the  whole  substance  of  infant  cir- 
cumcision. All  the  duties  and  all  the  promises  of  the 
latter  are  bound  up  in  the  faithful,  believing  nurture 
of  children. 

8.  Having  overseeing  and  teaching  officers. 

9.  They  have  a  holy  sacramental  supper  pointing 
back  to  the  crucifixion  of  Christ,  as  the  passover 
feast  pointed  forward  to  the  same. 

10.  They  have  the  ordinance  of  baptism,  which  is  a 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  133 

rite  designating  them  as  believers  and  initiating  them 
into  membership  ;  and,  also,  a  symbol  and  seal  of  the 
covenant  between  themselves  and  their  God,  as  was 
circumcision,  and  as  every  symbol  of  a  believer  must 
be.  We  promise  soon  to  demonstrate  the  identity  of 
the  two  rites. 

These  definitions  include  all  the  essential  features 
of  the  Christian  Church.  No  others  can  be  named 
which  are  not  necessarily  implied  in  them;  and 
the  reader  Avill  not  fail  to  see  that  they  are  essen- 
tially, and  almost  verbally,  those  of  the  Abrahamic 
which  have  before  been  given.  When,  therefore,  we 
shall  prove,  in  fulfilment  of  our  promise,  that  the 
covenants  and  symbols  of  these  two  institutions  have 
the  same  essential  features,  the  conclusion  cannot  be 
escaped  that  the  Abrahamic  and  Christian  churches 
are  one  and  the  same,  and  that  the  latter  is  another 
form  of  the  former.^ 

This  Identity  fully  Established  by  the  Teachings  of 
Christ  Himself  and  by  Those  of  the  Apostle  Paid. — 
In  Matt.  8:  10,11,  12,  Christ  says:  Verily  I  have 
not  found  so  great  faith,  no,  not  in  Israel.  And  I  say 
unto  you  that  many  shall  come  from  the  east  and  the 
west,  and  shall  sit  down  with  Abraham,  Isaac,  and 
Jacob,  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ;  but  the  sons  of  the 
kingdom  shall  be  cast  out  into  outer  darkness ;  there 
sliall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of  teeth. 

(1)    Those   sons   of  the   kingdom,  to  be  cast  out, 

1  In  the  definitions  of  the  Abrahamic,  Adamic,  Noachian,  and  Chris- 
tian churches  given  in  this  treatise,  we  have,  as  before  stated,  endeav- 
ored to  confine  ourselves  to  essential  church  elements,  letting  alone 
those  unessential  ones  which  distinguish  different  denominations  from 
each  other. 


134  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

must  have  been  Israelites,  as  the  phrase,  not  in  Is- 
rael, clearly  shows.  (2)  They  must  have  been  the 
unbelieving  sons  of  Israel,  as  their  casting  out  was 
the  penalty  of  their  unbelief;  also,  because  no  believ- 
ing one  would  be.  (3)  The  kingdom  of  which  they 
were  sons,  is  called  the  kingdom  of  heaven  in  the 
eleventh  verse.  Hence  they  were  unbelieving  sons 
of  tiie  kingdom  of  heaven ;  and  that  kingdom  must 
have  been  the  kingdom  of  Israel ;  God's  Peculiar 
People  of  old;  the  Abrahamic  Church.  (4)  They 
could  have  been  only  nominal  or  spurious  members 
of  it,  as  faith  was  absolutely  essential  to  a  real  mem- 
bership. (5")  Those  to  come  from  the  east  and  west 
to  sit  down  with  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  in  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,  were  those  gentiles  who,  in  all 
future  ages,  were  to  become  believers,  and,  as  such, 
enter  into  that  kingdom.  (6)  Those  patriarchs  were, 
at  the  time  of  Christ's  speaking,  in  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  in  heaven ;  and,  hence,  it  was  that  same  one 
in  heaven,  into  which  the  believing  gentiles  were  to 
go  and  sit  down  with  them  as  fellow-members. 
(7)  This  kingdom  of  heaven  in  heaven,  into  which 
the  believing  gentiles  were  to  enter,  was  the  very 
same  one  from  which  the  unbelieving  sons  were  to  be 
cast  out  as  spurious  members,  as  the  language  plainly 
shows.  They  must,  then,  have  been  members  of  it, 
of  some  sort,  otherwise  they  could  not  be  cast  out. 

(8).  Their  membership  in  it  necessitates  the  con- 
clusion that  the  Abrahamic  on  earth  and  that  in 
heaven  are  one  and  the  same  kingdom.  On  that 
supposition,  and  on  that  alone,  they  could  be  mem- 
bers of  the  latter.     The  two  being  identical,  as  sup- 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  135 

posed,  meinbersliip  in  one  was  membership  in  the 
other.  Spurious  as  well  as  real  members  of  that  on 
earth  would  be  the  same  of  the  other.  In  beino-  cast 
out  by  discipline  or  death  from  the  one,  they  were 
at  the  same  time  and  by  the  same  act  cast  out  from 
the  other.  As  every  spurious  member  of  the  church 
on  earth  ceases  at  his  death,  if  not  before  by  disci- 
pline, to  be  any  kind  of  a  member  of  it,  none  do  nor 
can  continue  such  in  the  kingdom  above  after  death. 
These  facts,  then,  show  conclusively  that  the  Abra- 
hamic  church  and  the  kingdom  of  heaven  in  heaven 
are  one  and  the  same. 

(9).  But  the  apostle  Paul  makes  it  equally  certain 
that  the  Christian  church  is,  also,  the  same  with  the 
kingdom  in  heaven  (Ep.  3 :  15) — both  one  family. 
Besides,  the  believing  Gentiles  were  to  enter  into 
that  kingdom  above  by  entering  into  the  phristian 
church  below,  considered  either  in  its  organic  form 
as  consisting  of  professing  believers  alone,  or  "its 
inorganic,  as  consisting  of  all  true  believers,  includ- 
ing the  non-professing. 

It  follows,  then,  that,  as  the  Abrahamic  and  Chris- 
tian churches  are  both  alike  identical  with  the  king- 
dom in  heaven,  they  must,  also,  be  identical  with 
each  other,  in  accordance  with  the  universally- 
accepted  maxim :  Two  or  more  things  identical  Avith 
another,  are  identical  with  each  other. 

This  casting  out  from  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  pre- 
dicted by  Christ,  was  to  be  the  continuation  of  a 
work  which  had  been  going  on  very  imperfectly  in 
all  the  previous  history  of  God's  people  in  this 
world.     Its  workings,  otherwise  than  by  death,  had 


136  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

been  confined  mostly  to  the  advents  of  great  refor- 
mations, as  has  been  sliown  in  previous  chapters  of 
this  treatise.  In  the  ministry  of  Christ  and  his  apos- 
tles it  was  carried  out  far  more  effectually  than  ever 
before.  He  gathered  around  him  a  little  brother- 
hood of  believing  Jews  as  his  disciples,  recognized 
them,  together  with  all  the  few  others  like  them,  as 
alone  the  true  Abrahamic  church,  and  enjoined  the 
same  policy  upon  his  disciples  and  their  successors. 
He  thus  struck  a  blow  which  soon  resulted  in  the 
real  casting  out  of  nearly  all  unbelieving  Jews.  It 
was,  doubtless,  this  winnowing  process  in  the  min- 
istry of  himself  and  his  apostles  to  which  he  pri- 
maril}^  referred  in  his  prediction.  By  the  conditions 
of  becoming  members  laid  down  by  him,  by  the  dis- 
cipline he  enjoined,  and  by  the  promised  bestowment 
of  his  guiding  spirit,  he,  did  all  he  wisely  could  to 
have  his  church  keep  herself  as  free  from  spurious 
members  as  it  could  be  made  to  do  in  this  imperfect 
world. 

But  this  prediction  of  Christ  had  further  reference 
to  the  casting  out,  by  discipline  or  death,  from  the 
Christian  church,  throughout  its  entire  future  his- 
tory, all  those  unbelieving  Jews  who  would,  through 
self-deception  or  otherwise,  and  undetected,  enter  it. 
Their  descent  from  Abraham,  though  a  great  honor 
and  of  great  spiritual  benefit  if  rightly  imj^roved, 
would  not  avail  to  protect  them  from  expulsion, 
excepting  as  it  led  them  to  repentance. 

His  prediction  involved  the  casting  out,  by  disci- 
pline or  death,  all  unbelieving  Gentile  members — 
those  of  all  coming  ages.     The  great  and  only  rea- 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  137 


son  for  the  casting  out  of  the  Jewish  sons  of  the 
kingdom  was  their  unbelief.  The  grand  principle 
underlying  and  embodied  in  the  prediction  is  that 
faith  is  absolutely  essential  to  real  church  member- 
ship;  and  that  all  members  destitute  of  it  must  be 
removed  either  by  their  reclamation  or  expulsion. 
Hence  the  prediction  involved  the  casting  out  from 
the  church  on  earth  all  unbelieving  ones  of  every 
race  and  ao-e. 

But  this  prediction  pointed  most  especially,  most 
broadly,  and  with  greatest  emphasis,  to  the  final  sepa- 
ration of  all  the  goats  from  the  sheep  at  the  great 
da}^  of  his  coming  in  his  glory.  Then  the  casting 
out  will  be  complete,  and  spurious  membership  be 
known  no  more  forever.  Then  the  Old  Jerusalem 
will  find  herself  at  length  transformed  into  the  New, 
all  glorious  within,  prepared  as  a  bride  adorned  for 
her  husband;  and  through  her  pearly  gates  there 
shall  in  no  wise  enter  anything  that  defileth,  neither 
whatsoever  worketh  abomination,  or  maketh  a  lie, 
but  only  they  which  are  written  in  the  Lamb's  book 
of  life. 

The  True  Definition  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven. — 
(1).  A  kingdom  has  for  its  true  definition:  A  king 
and  his  subjects  (2).  A  kingdom  of  heaven,  or  of 
God,  is  most  accurately  and  comprehensively  defined 
as  consisting  of  God,  its  king,  and  all  who  are  his 
subjects.  (3).  Tn  its  broadest  sense  it  includes  as 
the  latter  all  moral  beings,  both  good  and  bad,  as 
they  all  alike  owe  allegiance  to  its  divine  king,  and 
are  accountable  to  him  as  their  lawful  sovereign. 
(4).  Tn  a  restricted,  yet  higher  and  most  usual  sense. 


138  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

it  has  for  its  subjects  all  loyal  moral  beings  and 
them  alone.  (5).  Every  community  of  loyal  sub- 
jects, associated  together  as  one  under  God's  reign, 
is  a  kingdom  of  heaven.  (6).  Every  such  commu- 
nity contains,  by  representation,  the  entire  kingdom, 
for  the  reason  that  its  subjects  are  representatives 
of  all  his  loyal  subjects  in  the  universe,  and  that  in 
governing  these  few  he,  in  the  same  governing  acts, 
virtually  governs  all  the  others.  Queen  Victoria,  in 
ruling  little  Bermuda  island,  virtually  rules  all  her 
dominions ;  and  so  that  diminutive  civil  community 
is,  in  such  a  sense,  not  only  one  little  kingdom  of 
Great  Britain,  but  it  also  contains  within  itself  the 
entire  kingdom  of  its  imperial  monarch. 

It  follows  from  this  definition  (1)  that  every  bod}^ 
of  true  believers  upon  earth,  large  or  small,  even  if 
only  two  or  three,  associated  as  one  in  Christ,  organ- 
ized or  unorganized,  assembling  together  more  or 
less  frequently,  no  matter  if  onl}^  once,  is  a  veritable 
kingdom  of  heaven.  They  have  the  invisible  Christ 
with  them  as  their  king,  and  they  are  a  company  of 
his  loyal  subjects,  (2)  and  that  that  little  kingdom 
is  by  representation  the  whole  kingdom  of  heaven. 

When  the  wicked  Pharisees,  doubtless  seeking  to 
find  an  accusation  against  him,  came  and  asked 
when  the  kingdom  of  God  cometh,  he  replied :  "  The 
kingdom  of  God  is  among  you,  or  in  the  midst  of 
you"(see  Authorized  and  Revised  Version,  mg),  mean- 
ing thus :  I,  its  king,  and  these  disciples,  as  my  royal 
subjects,  are  the  kingdom  of  God ;  and  so  that  king- 
dom is  now  right  here  before  you.  In  them,  as  their 
representatives,  are  contained  all  the  other  subjects 


SCKII^TURAL   ARGUMENT.  139 

of  my  kingdom  on  earth  and  in  heaven;  therefore 
that  whole  kingdom  is  among  you.  It  did  not  come 
by  observation.  Your  eyes  were  too  blind  to  see  its- 
coming.  You  even  now  are  groping  around  with 
eyes  fast  shut,  professedly  seeking  to  find  what  is- 
now  actually  here  in  your  midst,  as  plain  to  be  seen 
by  all  having  open  eyes  as  the  unclouded  midday 
sun.  To  suppose  him  saying  that  that  kingdom  was- 
literally  within  each  or  any  one  of  those  abominable 
Pharisees  whom  he  addressed  is  absurd ;  as  well  say 
it  was  in  Satan  himself. 

It  also  follows  from  this  definition  (1)  that  every 
single  church,  being  an  organized  body  of  believers- 
under  the  kingship  of  Christ,  is  a  kingdom  of  heaven 
embodied  in  an  earthly  organic  form,  and  as  such 
virtually  includes  all  other  churches,  because  loyal 
subjects  with  them  of  the  same  entire  kingdom ;  (2) 
that  all  the  churches  of  a  country  considered  collec- 
tively as  one  are  the  kingdom  or  church  of  heaven 
in  that  country ;  (3)  that  all  the  churches  of  any 
one  age  are  collectively  the  kingdom  or  church  of 
that  age ;  (4)  and  that  the  kingdom  or  church  of 
one  age  is  found  with  its  identity  unimpaired  in  the 
kingdom  or  church  of  every  succeeding  age,  the 
dividing  lines  separating  them  purely  imaginary,  like 
lines  of  latitude  and  longitude  used  on  maps  to 
divide  the  undivided  and  invisible  surface  of  the 
earth. 

This  definition  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  gives  an 
easy  and  a  satisfactory  interpretation  to  the  many 
Bible  predictions  of  it,  as  "  coming,"  as  ''  near,"  as 
"  at  hand,"   etc.     They  are    seen  to  refer,   as    they 


140  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

must,  to  new  methods  of  its  development,  new  mani- 
festations of  its  power,  new  epochs  in  its  history; 
not  to  it  as  not  having  alwaj^s  been  in  the  earth  as 
well  as  in  heaven. 

In  view  of  what  we  have  now  learned  from  the 
study  of  this  passage,  Ave  do  not  see  how  any 
candid  mind  can  refuse  to  admit  that  in  it  Christ 
gives  unmistakable  authority  to  the  claim  that  the 
Abrahamic  is  a  genuine  church  of  God  and  is  iden- 
tical with  the  Christian. 

The  apostle  Paul  in  Romans  II,  17-24  happily  sets 
forth  this  same  transition  process  and  this  identity,  by 
like  ones  in  tree  culture.  Some  of  the  natural  branches 
(Jews)  were  broken  off  because  of  unbelief ;  and 
those  of  a  wild  olive  tree  (Gentiles)  were  grafted  in. 
The  severe  pruning  and  the  wise  grafting  left  the 
life  of  the  tree  unaffected,  and  secured  a  greatly  en- 
larged growth,  and  a  choice  fruitage.  But  they  did 
not  impair  the  identity  of  the  tree  in  the  least.  That 
remained  the  same  olive  tree,  as  when  it  sprang  from 
its  primal  germ-seed. 

The  Fainily  Element  3Iodified. — In  the  Christian 
church,  owing  to  changed  circumstances,  the  family 
element,  before  so  marked  and  prominent,  has  been, 
in  some  respects,  considerably  modified.  A  church 
now  does  not  often  consist  solel}^  of  a  family  of  pro- 
fessed believers,  much  less  of  a  patriarchal  one.  It 
does  not  often  regard  its  family  organization  as 
being  at  the  same  time  its  church  organization. 
While  families  made  up  of  faithful  believers  are 
church  units  in  their  composite  churches  to  which 
they  severally  belong,  they  yet  are  not  regarded  nor 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  141 

reported  as  so  many  churches.  This  partial  severing 
of  the  church,  as  it  respects  its  form,  from  the  fam- 
ily, resulted  necessarily  from  :  (1).  The  absence  of 
patriarchal  families.  Only  such  large  ones  could 
conveniently  constitute,  each  one,  a  distinct  body  of 
believers.  (2).  The  fact  that,  generally,  families  now 
soon  become  widely  scattered.  (3).  And  conse- 
quently, that  communities  of  believers  are  made  up, 
with  rare  exceptions,  of  only  parts  of  families.  But 
while  this  flesh  and  blood  element  has  somewhat  dis- 
appeared, the  family  element  in  its  higher  sense,  still 
remains  as  one  of  the  most  important  characteristics 
of  the  churches.  They  are  designated  in  the  New 
Testament  as  households  of  faith ;  their  members 
brethren  and  sisters,  the  elderly  ones  as  fathers,  the 
younger  as  children.  The  apostle  speaks  of  all  be- 
lievers on  earth,  together  with  the  glorified  ones 
above,  as  the  one  family  of  their  Father  in  heaven. 

A  Still  Higher  Development  of  the  Prijicijjle  of 
Separation. — The  advent  of  the  Christian  church 
witnessed  another,  and  a  more  marked,  development 
of  this  same  principle  of  the  separation  of  the  believ- 
ing from  the  non-believing,  by  church  lines,  of  which 
we  have  before  spoken — a  principle  which,  from  the 
first,  had  been  struggling  for  a  more  perfect  develop- 
ment with  slow,  imperceptible,  yet  real,  progress.  It 
appeared  in  the  cutting  off  from  Israel,  by  Christ,  be- 
cause of  their  unbelief,  all  the  Jews,-  excepting  a  few 
saintly  ones — the  latter  serving  as  a  seed-nucleus  of 
the  Christian  church.  The  old  olive  tree,  so  long 
favored  with  God's  loving,  faithful  nurture,  yet 
bearing  -  mostly  noxious  fruit,  was  pruned  of  its  evil 


142  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

branches,  and  into  it  were  grafted  wild  olive  scions 
— Gentile  believers — who  were  destined  to  become, 
by  their  growth,  branches  of  great  size  and  fruitful- 
ness,  and  to  constitute  nearly  the  whole  of  them,  un- 
til the  promised  time  of  grafting  back  the  old  stock 
(Jewish  believers)  should  come. 

This  principle  did,  indeed,  by  means  of  growth, 
attain  to  a  higher  development  in  the  Christian  than 
in  the  earlier  church.  But  there  still  remains  a  great 
deal  of  room  for  more  of  the  same.  Its  development 
in  the  churches  most  desirous  to  keep  themselves 
pure,  is  far  from  being  perfect.  The  numbers  of 
mere  nominal  members  in  the  most  careful  ones  are 
large,  while  in  a  great  many  others,  the  numbers 
whose  walk  is  notoriously  unchristian,  and  even  scan- 
dalous, is  sadly  large.  So  great  are  the  shortcomings 
of  Christian  churches  in  keeping  unworth}^  ones  from 
entering  them,  and  in  removing  those  who  have  en- 
tered, that  the  old  Jewish  church  does  not  compare 
with  the  Christian  so  unfavorably  as  it  otherwise 
would. 

An  Ajjology. — We  have  had  so  much  to  say,  in 
this  treatise,  of  this  principle,  as  having  been  in  the 
body  of  God's  Chosen  People  from  the  beginning ; 
struggling  all  the  while,  for  legitimate  measures  of 
manifestation,  yet  with  slow,  and,  most  of  the  time, 
imperceptible  progress — we  have  had  so  much  to  say 
of  this,  for  the  reason  that  its  existence  among  the 
people  of  God,  in  the  ages  before  Christ,  is  stoutly 
denied ;  and  that,  upon  this  its  alleged  non-existence, 
is  founded  an  objection  which,  if  valid,  would  be 
fatal  to  the  identity  of  the  two   churches.     If  non- 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  143 

believing  ones  had  a  legitimate  membership  in  the 
Abrahamic  church,  and  if  there  were  no  principle 
fundamental  to  it,  calling  for  the  keeping  them  from 
entering  into,  and  requiring  their  removal  from  it,  so 
far  as  practicable,  then  that  church  cannot  possibly 
be  the  same  with  the  Christian,  and  the  doctrine  of 
Infant  Baptism  can  have  no  sure  foundation  stone. 
This  being  so,  we  have  certainly  been  justified  in  con- 
sidering the  point  so  many  times,  and  in  giving  it  so 
much  emphasis.  A  foundation  rock  upon  which  the 
whole  superstructure  so  largely  stands,  surely  needs, 
by  repeated  examinations,  to  be  shown  solid  and  im- 
movable. 

A  PresumiJtion  of  G-reat  Weight. — The  Christian 
church  having  now  been  shown  identical  with  the 
Abrahamic,  it  becomes  well-nigh  certain  that  it  has 
the  same  covenant  and  symbol ;  and  also,  has  them  in 
corresponding  forms.  We,  therefore,  start  off  in  our 
search  for  them  with  a  presumption  in  our  favor 
which  of  itself  is  well-nigh  conclusive  in  the  case. 

II.  The  Christian  Covenant  Defined.  By 
ITS  Definitions,  Shown  to  be  Another  Form  of 
the  Abrahaivhc. — According  to  the  teachings  of 
Christ,  all  believers  are  the  true  seed  of  Abraham. 
The  Christian  church,  then,  being  composed  of  be- 
lievers, are  the  seed  of  Abraham  and,  as  such,  must 
inherit  his  covenant,  given  to  him  and  his  seed.  This 
alone  is  enough  to  settle  the  question  in  dispute. 

That  there  is  some  kind  of  a  covenant,  and  that  an 
all-important  one,  between  God  and  his  Christian 
church  is  absolutely  certain.  Mutual  covenants  are 
essential  to  every  society  of  moral  beings,  large  or 
small. 


144  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

One  cannot  exist  without  them.  As  possible  to 
have  a  physical  object  without  the  cohesive  attrac- 
tion of  its  constituent  atoms.  Covenants  necessarily 
co-exist  with  brotherly  love.  Where  one  is  the  other 
must  be.  Both  together,  never  separately,  bind 
moral  beings  in  worthy  societies.  Mutual  cove- 
nants between  husband  and  wife,  between  them  both 
and  their  children,  and  between  the  children  them- 
selves, are  the  soul  of  the  family.  Without  them 
there  can  be  no  family.  Mutual  covenants  .between 
the  civil  government  and  its  subject  citizens,  and  be- 
tween those  citizens  themselves,  are  the  soul  of  the 
state.     Without  them  it  could  not  be  a  state. 

Mutual  covenants  between  God  and  his  loyal  sub- 
jects, and  between  those  subjects  themselves,  are  the 
soul  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Without  them  there 
could  be  none  such.  If,  then,  there  is  no  all-impor- 
tant one  between  God  and  the  Christian  church.  He 
cannot  be  its  God,  and  it  cannot  be  his  church. 

The  Definitions. — The  character  of  God,  as  being 
infinitely  benevolent  and  holy,  makes  it  certain  that 
he  is  in  covenant  only  with  its  believing  members, 
and  is  with  them  upon,  and  solely  upon,  the  follow- 
ing necessar}^  promises  and  conditions  : 

I.  The  promises.  (1).  To  be  their  God.  (2). 
A  godly  seed  ;  spiritual  children;  those  born  into  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  through  their  instrumentality; 
especially  those  of  their  natural  seed  thus  born — pre- 
eminently, Christ.  (3).  A  dwelling-place  inheri- 
tance, both  in  this  world  and  in  heaven.  (4).  Pro- 
bationary blessings  for  themselves,  their  children, 
both  the   believing  and  non-believing,  and  all  other 


SCRIPTUKAL   ARGUMENT.  145 

subjects  of  their  nurture  and  prayers.  (5).  Perma- 
nency of  all  these  promised  blessings. 

II.  The  conditions:  (1).  Faith.  (2).  Prayer  and 
godliness.  (3).  Self-denial.  (4).  Entire  consecra- 
tion.    (5).  Faithful  parental  nurture. 

It  must  be  confessed  by  every  candid  mind  that 
these  definitions  are  self-evident,  and  so  can  but  be 
the  true  ones  of  the  covenant  certainly  existing  be- 
tween God  and  his  Christian  church.  It  is  incon- 
ceivable that  a  benevolent,  holy  God-  should  not 
make  just  such  promises,  on  just  such  conditions,  to 
them  as  a  body  of  Christian  believers. 

The  reader  will  remember  that  these  very  same 
ones  were  given,  in  Part  II  (Scriptural  Argument), 
of  the  Abrahamic,  as  set  forth  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. Their  definitions,  then,  being  the  same,  they 
themselves  must  be  one  and  the  same,  each  one  a 
a  different  form  of  the  other.  The  Abrahamic  must 
be  simply  an  embodiment  of  that  covenant  between 
God  and  his  children  which  pervades  the  universe  ; 
found  wherever  God  and  his  loyal  moral  creatures 
are  found.  The  same  is  true  of  the  Christian.  To 
deny  that  the  later  is  the  same  with  the  earlier,  then, 
is  like  denying  that  the  sunlight  flooding  this  earth, 
is  the  same  with  that  illuminating  her  sister  planet, 
Venus  ;  like  denying  that  terrestrial  gravitation  is 
the  same  with  that  exemplified  in  that  brilliant  star, 
Sirius. 

The  earlier  covenant  is  proclaimed  not  only  in  its 

several  different  verbal  announcements  to  Abraham, 

Isaac,  Jacob,  and  Moses,  but   also,  indirectly  and  by 

implication,  in  every  chapter  and  verse  of  the  ancient 

11 


146  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

Scriptures.  Every  command  in  them  is  a  covenant 
command,  every  promise  a  covenant  promise,  every 
condition  a  covenant  one.  Just  so  with  the  Chris- 
tian Scriptures.  All  their  commands,  promises,  con- 
ditions, etc.,  are  covenant  ones.  Hence  the  accurate 
titles  of  the  two  are  not,  as  in  the  Authorized  Ver- 
sion, Old  and  New  Testaments,  but  Old  and  New 
Covenants,  as  in  the  Revised. 

The  Christian  has  no  distinctive  statute-announce- 
ments of  it  in  the  New  Testament.  It  needed  none. 
It  had  been  so  announced  centuries  before,  and,  for 
that  reason,  such  re-announcements  were  not  neces- 
sary. It  is,  however,  wrapped  up  in  every  one  of  its 
commands,  promises,  and  conditions,  especially  in 
Christ's  last  great  command  to  all  believers,  "  Go  ye 
into  all  the  world,"  etc.,  and  his  inspiring  covenant- 
promise,  "  Lo !  I  am  with  you  alway." 

But  we  are  told  that  Jeremiah  predicts  a  new  cov- 
enant as  follows  :  ''  After  those  days,"  saith  the  Lord, 
"  I  will  put  my  law  in  their  inward  parts,  and  write 
it  in  their  hearts,  and  will  be  their  God  and  they 
shall  be  my  people.  And  they  shall  teach  no  more 
every  man  his  neighbor,  saying,  '  Know  ye  the  Lord, 
for  all  shall  know  him  from  the  least  of  them  even 
unto  the  greatest  of  them,'  saith  the  Lord,  for  I  will 
forgive  tlieir  iniquities,  and  remember  their  sins  no 
more."     Jeremiah  xxxi :  33,  34. 

But  this  covenant,  new  in  form  not  in  substance, 
is  certainly  all  of  it  wrapped  up  in  the  Abrahamic. 

It  contains  substantially  the  same  commands, 
promises,  and  conditions,  which  are  involved  in  tlie 
latter,  as  we  have  many  times  shown. 


SCRIPTURAL    ARGUMENT.  147 

The  Saviour  also  speaks  of  a  new  covenant.  In 
Matt.  26  :  28  (Rev.  Ver.) :  For  this  is  my  blood  of  the 
new  covenant  which  is  shed  for  many  unto  the  remis- 
sion of  sins.  That  cup  was  a  symbol  of  his  blood, 
with  which  he  Avas  to  seal  that  new  covenant  between 
himself  and  believers.  Manifestly  it  was  new  only 
as  in  a  new  stage  of  development.  It  evidently  was 
new  just  as  his  command,  Love  one  another,  was  new ; 
new,  yet  as  old  as  eternity,  binding  upon  those  before 
his  day  just  as  really  as  upon  those  then  personally 
addressed  by  him.  This  new  covenant  in  his  blood 
is  clearly  seen  in  the  Abrahamic.  It  has  folded  up 
in  it  all  the  commands  and  promises  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament; the  Abrahamic  has  the  same,  as  we  have  be- 
fore seen  ;  hence  one  must  be  the  same  with  the 
■other. 

Alexander  McLaren  (Baptist)  says,  in  Sunday 
School  Times  (Vol.  xxxvi.  No.  4,  Jan.  27, 1894 :  That 
article  (Gen.  17 :  8)  of  the  old  covenant  is  repeated  in 
the  new,  with  this  addition :  And  they  shall  be  my 
people,  which  is  really  involved  in  it. 

The  apostle  Peter,  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  assures 
the  conscience-smitten  Jews  before  him :  For  the 
promise  is  unto  you  and  your  children,  and  to  all 
them  that  are  afar  off,  even  as  many  as  the  Lord  our 
God  shall  call.  In  other  words,  to  believers  in  all  the 
world,  and  those  of  all  the  ages.  He  thus  gives  the 
Abrahamic  in  its  fuller  form,  like  that  given  to  Christ 
in  the  second  Psalm,  and  so  gives  his  sanction  to  that 
broad  view  of  it  which  has  been  claimed  in  this  trea- 
tise. In  the  next  chapter  he  gives  the  people,  filled 
with  amazement  at  the  healing  of  the  lame  man,  a 


148  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

like  encouraging  assurance :  Ye  are  the  children  of 
the  prophets  and  of  the  covenant  of  God  made  with 
your  fathers ;  and  hi  thy  seed  shall  all  the  kindreds  of 
~~.  the  earth  he  blessed.  Thus  the  first  great  public  gos- 
pel invitation  after  the  ascension,  resulting  in  the 
first  great  ingathering  into  the  Christian  Church,  was 
based  upon  the  Abrahamic  covenant.  Let  the  reader 
bear  in  mind  that  this  use  of  it  was  made  after  the 
Christian  dispensation  had  been  ushered  in,  and  by 
the  great  apostolic  and  inspired  representative  of  the 
Christian  Church.  This  his  invitation  then,  sets  his 
seal  upon  that  covenant  as  actually  in  the  Christian 
Church  as  its  oivn.  What  other  meaning  can  be 
given  to  his  language  ?  How  can  such  a  conclusion 
possibly  be  avoided  ? 


CHAPTER   X. 

Part  Fifth. —  Continued. 

ABRAHAMIC   INSTITUTIONS   IN    THE   CHEISTIAN 

AGE. 

HI.  Christian  Baptism  Defined  ;  By  its  Def- 
initions SHOWN  TO  BE  ANOTHER  FORM  OF  CIRCUM- 
CISION. 

A  Suppositio7i  grayited  in  this  cliafter^for  the  sake  of 
Argimient^  viz,:  Christian  Baptism  is  another  form 
of  Circumcision^  even  on  the  Supposition  that  the 
Ordinance  form  of  Infant  Baptism,  Corresponding  to 
that  of  Infant  Circumcision,  does  not  exist  hy  Divine 
Authority  in  the  Christian  Church. 

We  now  have,  to  begin  with,  four  basal  and  largely 
decisive  facts  bearing  upon  the  question  before  us, 
viz.:  (1).  All  the  essential  features  of  circumcision, 
being  common  to  all  believers,  are  certainly  in  the 
Christian  Church.  This  is  necessarily  the  case  with 
all  divinely-appointed  ordinances  as  before  shown. 
In  their  essential  features,  they  all  are,  and  always 
must  be,  in  the  Christian  Church.  Hence  this  rite 
must  thus  be  in  the  Christian  Church.  (2).  The  pre- 
sumption is  that  it  also  exists  there,  as  embodied  in 
an  ordinance-form  corresponding  to  its  Abrahamic. 
In  case  of  every  ordinance  given  to  God's  people  of 
any  age  or  place  to  meet  their  necessities,  there  is 
always  a  presumption  that  it  is  also  given  to  them  of 
every  age  and  place  in  the  same  or  equivalent  forms. 
The  fact  that  there  is  in  the  Christian  age  an  organ- 


150  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

ized  church  and  covenant  corresponding  to  the  Abra- 
hamic,  as  before  shown,  greatly  augments  the  pre- 
sumption for  an  ordinance  corresponding  to  their 
coordinate  Abrahamic  rite,  circumcision.  This  great 
presumption  in  the  case  before  us  must  be  admitted. 
(3).  The  ordinance  of  baptism  certainly  does  exist  in 
the  Christian  Church.  (4).  If  circumcision  does  also 
exist  there  in  corresponding  ordinance-form,  it  must 
be  in  that  of  baptism,  as  that  is  the  only  one  having 
any  likeness  to  a  correspondence,  known  there.  Now 
we  claim  that  these  four, certain  facts  throw  much 
light  upon  the  question  before  us,  and  so  do  much  to 
clear  the  way  for  further  investigation.  Indeed,  we 
regard  tliem  alone  as  sufficient  to  decide  the  point  in 
dispute.  They,  of  themselves,  seem  to  us  to  make 
the  conclusion  for  which  we  are  contending  morally 
certain. 

It  is  said,  by  way  of  objection,  that  Infant  Baptism 
is  not  found  in  the  New  Testament,  and  was  not  prac- 
tised in  the  apostolic  churches.  This  is  strenuously 
insisted  upon  as  an  historical  fact,  and  urged  as  a 
fatal  objection  to  this  alleged  identity  of  the  two 
rites.  Well,  be  it  so.  Let  such  be  the  fact.  Let  us 
in  this,  and  only  in  this,  chapter  admit  that  the  rite 
was  not  known  in  those  churches  as  a  practised  ordi- 
nance. Yea,  more,  let  it  be  assumed  that  it  was  not 
designed  by  Christ  to  be  practised  in  ordinance-form 
in  all  the  Christian  age ;  and  yet,  even  upon  that 
assumption,  we  promise  to  show  the  identity  of  cir- 
cumcision and  baptism.  AVe  claim  to  be  able  to  sliow 
that  the  latter  is  another  form  of  the  former,  even  if 
it  was  not  designed  to  be  administered  personally,  in 


SCEIPTUKAL   AKGUMENT.  151 

form,  to  children  by  the  Christian  churches.  It 
is  upon  this  assumption,  granted,  at  present  for  the 
sake  of  argument,  that  we  now  proceed  to  consider 
this  alleged  identity  now  under  investigation. 

1.  No  Objection  Furnished  by  this  Here-admitted 
Supposition. — The  essential  features  of  Infant  Baptism 
would  and  must  exist  in  those  churches  all  the  same. 
It  cannot  be  believed  that .  the  essential  features  of 
Infant  Baptism,  specified  in  its  theory,  set  forth  at 
the  commencement  of  this  treatise,  do  not  exist  in 
them,  inasmuch  as  they  necessarily  do  so  among  all 
believers.  It  can  by  no  means  be  believed  that  the 
commands  and  promises  to  faithful  parents,  the  duty 
of  parental  faith,  consecration,  pledges,  nurture,  and 
the  corresponding  divine  assurances,  are  not  in  every 
Christian  church.  Now  this  actual  and  necessary 
presence  there  of  its  essential  features,  is  all  that  is 
needed  wholly  to  remove  this  objection  urged. 

Every  divinely-appointed  rite  is  always  found 
wherever  its  essential  features  are  found.  It  is  also 
virtually  found  there  in  an  appropriate  form. 

On  this  supposition  the  form  of  the  rite,  in  the  case 
of  the  children  of  believing  parents,  may  be  consid- 
ered as  merged  into  the  form  given  their  parents.  As 
in  consecrating  himself  to  God,  a  believing  parent,  by 
that  act,  necessarily  also  consecrates  his  children  and 
all  his  possessions  ;  so  in  being  baptized  in  form  him- 
self, he,  in  so  doing,  necessarily  baptizes  his  children, 
virtually  in  form,  in  the  same  sense,  for  substance,  as 
when  he  literally  gives  them  the  form  of  the  rite.  If 
it  were  physically  impossible  to  give  them  the  literal 
form,  it  of  course  would  not  be  done ;  but  in  that 


152  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

case  they  would  be  virtually  baptized  in  form  all 
the  same — in  the  form  administered  to  their  par- 
ents. 

2.  No  objection  to,  but  a  strong  reason  for,  this 
alleged  identity,  comes  from  the  differences  in  the 
forms  of  the  two  ordinances.  Change  in  the  forms 
of  symbols  is  usual  at  the  advent  of  new  epochs. 
The  Abrahamic  had  become  so  largely  debased  in  the 
great  degeneracy  of  that  church,  that  a  new  one  of 
virgin  purity  was  demanded.  Besides,  circumcision, 
while  nicely  adapted  to  the  peculiar  circumstances  of 
the  Abrahamic  age  and  country,  was  not  at  all  adapt- 
ed to  those  of  the  Christian,  especially  in  view  of  the 
coming  world-wide  use  of  the  rite  in  the  latter. 
Again,  a  bloody  rite  was  very  appropriate  to  a  dispen- 
sation of  animal  sacrifices,  and  of  other  prophetic 
types  of  the  promised  Messiah  bleeding  and  dying 
upon  his  cross ;  but  far  from  being  so  in  one  in  which 
they  had  been,  in  form,  set  aside  by  their  fulfilment. 
Baptism  is,  as  confessed  by  all,  especially  adapted,  in 
form,  to  the  circumstances  of  its  dispensation,  and 
for  that  reason  is  the  wisely-appointed  successor  of 
circumcision. 

3.  No  objection  to,  but  a  strong  reason  for,  the  same, 
comes  from  the  fact  that  females  are  baptized,  in 
form,  when  they  were  not  so  circumcised.  They 
were  virtually  circumcised  in  form  as  well  as  in  sub- 
stance. They  were  always  numbered  with  the  cir- 
cumcised, never  with  the  uncircumcised.  The  form, 
in  their  case,  was  merged  into  that  of  the  males  ; 
hence  the  Abrahamic  rite,  owing  to  its  change  of 
form,  now  demands  their  baptism,  in  form,  equall}^ 


SCEIPTUKAL   ARGUMENT.  153 

with  that  of  the  males.     If  it  did  not,  then  it  would 
show  itself  not  identical  with  baptism. 

4.  No  objection  to,  but  a  great  reason  for,  this  iden- 
tity, comes  from  the  fact  that  John  the  Baptist,  Christ 
and  the  apostles,  baptised  those  who  had  been  circum- 
cised. 

In  business  houses  it  is  customary  to  re-label  goods 
when  a  new  label  has  been  substituted  for  the  old 
one.  When  a  new  army  uniform  has  been  adopted, 
it  is  used  by  the  old  soldiers  who  have  always  worn 
the  superseded  one,  as  well  as  by  the  new  recruits. 
Circumcision,  because  of  its  great  debasement,  had 
largely  ceased  to  designate  believers.  In  the  public 
mind  it  at  best  only  marked  those  of  Jewish  descent, 
without  reference  to  their  character.  Hence  the  de- 
basement of  the  rite  in  public  esteem  corresponded  to 
that  general  among  the  apostate  Jews.  The  outside 
world  judged  it  by  the  loathsome  depravity  of  the 
wicked  chief  priests  and  pharisees  ;  and  consequently 
it  was  to  them  a  symbol  of  narrow  bigotry  and  an 
exceedingly  offensive  self-righteous  pride.  It  was 
necessary,  therefore,  to  give  the  virgin  rite  of  bap- 
tism to  believing  Jews  to  distinguish  them  as  such. 

5.  Another  very  weighty  reason  for  this  identity 
of  the  two  rites,  so  dissimilar  in  forms,  comes  from 
the  fact,  already  shown  to  be  a  necessary  one,  that 
all  the  essential  features  of  circumcision  are  certainly 
in  the  Christian  church.  This  point  has  before  been 
briefly  stated ;  but  its  great  importance  seems  to  de- 
mand its  restatement.  As  then  shown,  the  presence 
of  this,  its  substance,  makes  that  of  an  appropriate 
form  exceedingly  probable ;  all  the  more  so  because 


154  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

it  had  one  in  the  Abrahamic,  a  great  deal  more  so  be- 
cause of  the  now  proved  identity  of  the  two  churches. 
This  identity  of  the  churclies  must  demand  a  form 
for  these  substance-features  of  this  symbol  in  the 
one,  corresponding  to  that  found  in  the  other.  It 
must,  then,  demand  baptism  for  that  form,  as  that  is 
a  most  appropriate  one,  and  the  one,  and  the  only 
one,  actually  filling  the  same  office  there,  as  we  shall 
see. 

6.  An  absolutely  conclusive  reason  for  this  iden- 
tity of  the  two  rites  comes  from  the  fact  that  they 
both  have  substantially  the  same  definitions. 

We  gave  the  definitions  of  the  ancient  rite  in  Part 
Second  of  this  Scriptural  Argument.  We  now  pur- 
pose to  show  that  the  same  apply  equally  well  to  the 
Christian. 

These  definitions,  now  to  be  given,  will  not  have 
any  special  reference  to  their  universal  substance, 
general  benevolence,  as  it  will  not  be  denied  that 
that  is  the  same  in  both  ;  nor  to  their  local  and  tem- 
poral forms,  as  these  confessedly  differ  from  each 
other;  but  they  will  have  special,  and  almost  exclu- 
sive, reference  to  their  essential  features  (their  more 
specific  substance)  which  is  common  to  all  believers 
in  this  world. 

DEFINITIONS    OF    CHRISTIAN    BAPTISM. 

1.  A  symbol  of  a  believer.  No  non-believing  one 
can  be  a  baptized  person. 

2.  A  symbol  of  God's  covenant  between  himself 
and  believers  in  behalf  of  themselves  and  their  chil- 
dren. 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  155 

All  true  believers  are  certainly  in  such  a  covenant. 
A  symbol  designating  them  as  believers  must  desig- 
nate them  as  in  it,  and  so  must  be  a  symbol  of  that 
covenant. 

3.  A  symbol  administered,  by  believing  ones,  to 
their  children  to  designate  them  as  those  in  whose 
behalf  they  themselves  are  in  covenant  with  God. 

This  their  children's  covenant  relation  to  them  as 
believers,  is  certainly  a  fact.  Hence  the  substance  of 
the  baptismal  symbol  designating  it,  is  certainly  ad- 
ministered to  their  children.  Hence  its  form  is  vir- 
tually administered  ;  for  the  reason  that  the  giving  of 
the  substance  always  necessarily  involves  the  virtual 
giving  of  its  form. 

As  with  all  rites,  the  form  of  this  is  not  absolutely 
essential.  It  may  be  laid  aside  whenever  circum- 
stances certainly  demand  it.  Many  Baptist  Chris- 
tians cannot  safely  be  immersed  in  their  last  sick- 
ness, as  they  would  be  glad  to  be,  and  so  do  not 
receive  the  form  of  baptism  ;  but  they  are  baptized 
believers  all  the  same.  They  literally  received  the 
substance,  and  virtually  received  its  form  when  they 
first  became  believers,  and  so  fully  complied  with  the 
divine  command,  "  Believe  and  be  baptized."  It  fol- 
lows, then,  that  the  claim  that  the  form  of  infant 
baptism  is  not  by  divine  appointment  in  the  Chris- 
tian cliurch  admitted  in  this  chapter,  does  not  conflict 
with  the  definition  here  given.  The  certain  fact  that 
parents  rightly  administer  the  rite  to  their  childreu 
literally  in  substance  and  virtually  (not  literally)  in 
form,  perfectly  justifies  it. 

4.  A  seal  affixed  to  this  covenant  between  God 


156  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

and  believers,  to  declare  and  emphasize  its  sacred- 
ness  and  surety. 

Every  divinely-appointed  symbol  of  a  covenant 
not  only  designates  it  as  a  covenant,  but  also  nec- 
essarily declares  and  emphasizes  its  sacredness  and 
surety,  and  for  that  reason  it  is  and  must  be  a  seal 
of  it. 

5.  A  symbol  expressing,  making  prominent  and 
helping  to  preserve  that  wide  moral  separation  be- 
tween believers,  together  with  those  under  their  cov- 
enant-nurture on  the  one  hand,  and  on  the  other  all 
unbelieving  ones — more  especially  the  grossly  wicked 
ones  dwelling  around,  and  to  some  extent  unavoid- 
ably commingling  with  them. 

6.  A  symbol  expressing  and  emphasizing  the  value 
and  necessity  of  moral  purity,  and  the  loathsome, 
sinful  character  of  moral  impurity.  It  especially 
emphasizes  the  duty  of  cleanliness  from  all  the  low, 
debasing  lusts  of  the  flesh. 

7.  A  symbol  of  cleansing  by  the  blood  of  Christ, 
from  the  deadly  pollution  of  sin. 

8.  A  symbol  of  burial  and  resurrection  to  newness 
of  life  with  Christ. 

9.  In  a  word,  a  symbol  of  all  the  righteous  expe- 
riences of  believers,  and  of  all  the  truths  in  which 
they  believe — all  the  truths  of  their  holy  religions. 

These  definitions,  expressing  or  involving  all  the 
essential  features  of  Christian  baptism,  are  exactly 
the  same  ones  as  those  of  circumcision  given  in 
chapter  VI,  and  like  them  are,  in  their  substance, 
common  to  all  believers. 

The    Words    of  Chnst    arid    Other  Neiv    Testament 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  157 

Statements  make  Baptism  a  Covenant  Seal. — When 
Christ,  at  the  paschal  feast,  the  night  before  he 
suffered,  took  a  cup  containing  the  crimson  fruit  of 
the  vine  and  gave  it  to  his  disciples,  he  said  to 
them :  For  this  is  my  blood  of  the  new  covenant 
(Rev.  Ver.  Mg.).  This  statement  is,  as  we  think, 
correctly  interpreted  as  follows  : 

(1).  He  was  to  seal  that  covenant  with  his  blood, 
and,  in  so  doing,  would  make  it  a  seal  of  the  same. 
In  what  other  sense  could  it  be  the  blood  of  that 
covenant,  if  not  its  seal?  Moses  took  the  words  and 
judgments  which  he  had  received  from  Israel's 
covenant  God,  when  in  the  mount,  and  wrote  them 
in  a  book — the  book  of  the  covenant.  After  he  had 
read  them  to  the  people  and  witnessed  their  solemn 
vows  of  compliance,  he  took  sacrificial  blood  from 
the  altar  and  sprinkled  it  upon  the  people  and  said  : 
Behold  the  blood  of  the  covenant  which  the  Lord 
made  with  you  concerning  all  these  words  (Ex. 
24:  7,  8).  By  that  blood-sprinkling  he  set  forth  and 
greatly  emphasized  the  sacredness  and  surety  of  that 
covenant.  He  thus  made  it  its  blood-seal.  Blood 
used  for  such  a  covenant  purpose  is,  and  must  be,  a 
covenant  seal.  Now,  for  our  own  part,  we  cannot 
resist  the  conclusion  that  these  words  of  Christ  con- 
tain an  intended  allusion  to  that  blood  sprinkled  by 
Moses,  as  the  great  type  which  he  was  to  fulfil  upon 
the  morrow  by  shedding  his  blood  upon  his  promised 
seed — thus  making  it  a  blood  seal  of  that  same 
covenant  between  himself  and  them.  Jn  that  case, 
his  blood  was,  indeed,  the  blood  of  the  new  covenant 
— its  most  significant  and  solemn  seal. 


158  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

(2).  That  cup  which  Christ  said  was  his  blood  of 
the  new  covenant  was  such  in  a  symbolic  sense. 
Because  of  its  color,  it  was  a  striking  picture  of  that 
blood  and  so  was  a  happy  symbol  of  it.  For  that 
reason  it  is  called  that  blood  itself.  It  was  so  called 
by  Christ  in  accordance  with  that  universal  usage 
which  often  speaks  of  a  symbol  as  the  thing  sym- 
bolized. 

(3).  Every  other  object  which  pictures  Christ's 
blood  is  also  a  symbol  of  the  same,  and  as  such  is  his 
blood  of  the  new  covenant  in  the  very  same  sense  in 
which  that  cup  was.  A  Christian,  touchingly  re- 
minded of  Christ's  blood  running  down  his  body  and 
dropping  upon  the  ground  by  the  sight  of  raindrops 
trickling  down  the  drooping  branches  of  a  tree,  sees 
in  them  a  symbol  of  that  blood.  He  sees  the  blood 
of  the  new  covenant  like  as  he  does  in  the  sacra- 
mental cup.  Such  do  not  have  the  same  degree  of 
sacredness  as  the  one  set  apart  for  that  purpose,  but 
they  symbolize  the  same  blood  and  are  that  same 
blood-seal  in  symbol. 

(4).  Baptismal  water  is  certainly  a  striking  and  a 
scriptural  picture  of  the  cleansing  blood  of  Christ. 
These  New  Testament  phrases, — "  Be  baptized  and 
wash  away  your  sins."  "  Wash."  "  Washed." 
"  Washed  in  his  blood."  "  Washing  of  water  in 
his  blood."  "  Washing  of  regeneration,"  all  express 
the  washing  of  sinful  men  in  the  blood  of  Christ. 
They  all  point  to  baptism  as  the  literal  fact  from 
which  they  as  figures  of  speech  are  derived. 

It  cannot  then  be  disputed  that  one  important 
thing  for  which  Christ  gave  the  rite  of  baptism  was 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMEXT.  159 

to  mirror  that  moral  cleansing  which  his  blood,  and 
that  alone,  accomplishes.  It  must,  therefore,  be  a 
divinely-appointed  symbol  of  that  blood  which  he 
made  a  seal  of  the  new  covenant;  and  so  that  self- 
same seal-blood  itself,  in  the  very  same  sense  (in 
symbol)  in  which  that  cup  then  was  and  still  is. 
We  have  before  seen  that  this  covenant,  thus  sealed, 
is  that  of  the  Christian  church — that  between  Christ 
and  his  redeemed  ones — and  that  it  is  identical  with 
the  Abrahamic. 

These  words  and  phrases  then,  confirm  and  greatly 
emphasize  the  claim  that  Christian  Baptism  is,  and 
must  be,  a  seal  of  the  Christian  covenant  between 
God  and  believers ;  and,  as  that  has  been  shown  to 
be  the  same  with  the  Abrahamic,  its  seal  (baptism) 
must,  also,  be  identical  with  the  seal  (circumcision) 
of  the  other. 

The  reader  will  not  need  be  told  again  that  all 
these  definitions  of  baptism,  given  in  this  chapter, 
are,  substantially,  and  to  a  great  extent,  verbally 
the  same  with  those  of  circumcision  given  in  Part 
Second. 

In  view,  then,  of  these  definitions  of  the  Abra- 
hamic and  Christian  institutions  respectively,  which 
we  have  given  at  length,  in  Chapters  Y,  VI,  IX,  X, 
and  which  have  been  certainly  shown  to  be  respec- 
tively identical  with  each  other,  so  we  claim,  it  surely 
follows  that  the  respective  identities  of  the  institu- 
tions themselves,  as  well  as  those  of  their  definitions, 
have  been  fully  established,  inasmuch  as  identity  of 
definitions  necessarily  makes  that  of  the  things  de- 
fined absolutely  certain. 


160  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

The  conclusion,  therefore,  is  inevitable  that  the 
three  Abrahamic  ones  are,  as  we  promised  to  prove, 
legitimate  and  adequate  proof-texts  for  Infant  Bap- 
tism in  the  Christian  church — they  making  it  lit- 
erally there  in  its  essential  features,  and  virtually 
there  in  its  form. 

The  remainder  of  this  Scriptural  Argument  will  be 
mostly  historical, — attempting  to  show  that  Infant 
Baptism,  in  its  Abrahamic  form,  circumcision,  was 
practised  by  Jewish  believers  in  the  ministries  of 
John,  Christ,  and  the  apostles  ;  also  that  New  Tes- 
tament records  of  some  instances  of  its  practice  in  its 
Christian  form  in  the  apostolic  churches  are  found. 


CHAPTER   XL 

Part  Fifth. —  Continued. 

ABRAHAMIC    INSTITUTIONS    IN    THE    CHRIS- 
TIAN   AGE. 

The  Supposition  of  the  Last  Chapter  Withdrawn, 
AND  ITS  Opposite  to  be  Established,  viz.  :  Chris- 
tian Baptism  Being  Another  Form  of  Circumci- 
sion, AS  NOW  Proved,  not  only  includes  the  Es- 
sential Features  of  Infant  Circumcision,  but  also, 
BY  Divine  Authority,  those  same  Features  Em- 
bodied IN  THE  Corresponding  Form  of  Infant 
Baptism. 

Having  shown  that  Christian  baptism,  even  upon 
the  supposition  that  it  includes  only  the  essential 
features  of  infant  circumcision  (not  any  changeable 
form  of  it)  is,  nevertheless,  another  form  of  the 
ancient  rite,  and  so,  must,  and  does,  virtually/  include 
the  form  of  Infant  Baptism.  Our  next  step  is  to 
show  that  it  actually  does  literally  include  Infant 
Baptism  as  its  corresponding  equivalent  form.  This 
can  only  be  done  by  showing  that  it  was  literally 
practised  in  the  apostolic  churches.  Hence,  we  now 
turn,  as  in  duty  bound,  to  a  careful  examination  of 
the  New  Testament  to  see  if  its  records  substantiate 
our  claim. 

1.  Antecedent  Probabilities. — What  was  established 
in  the  Argument  from  Reason,  viz. :  Giving  its  form 
to  non-believing  children  not  inherently  wrong,  but 
12 


162  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

most  useful  in  its  tendencies  and  legitimate  results, 
and  all  the  conclusive  reasons  which  have  thus  far 
been  given  to  demonstrate  the  scriptural  authority  of 
the  rite,  go  to  make  it  exceedingly  probable  that 
Christian  baptism,  as  the  successor  of  the  ancient 
rite,  does  certainly  include  infant  circumcision  in  the 
form,  as  well  as  essential  features,  of  Infant  Baptism. 
The  fact  that  Christian  baptism  has  been  shown  to 
be  none  other  than  the  Abrahamic  rite,  itself,  in  an- 
other form,  and,  as  such,  must  include  the  essential 
features  of  infant  circumcision,  gives  a  probability, 
amounting  to  little  less  than  demonstration,  to  the 
claim  that  it  actually  does  include  those  features 
embodied  in  the  form  of  Infant  Baptism,  as  its  cor- 
responding form. 

2.  This  question  is  not  determined,  as  many  claim, 
by  the  baptismal  clause  in  the  last  command  of 
Christ ;  nor  by  that  in  the  exhortation  of  Peter  at 
the  day  of  Pentecost.  It  is  claimed  that,  had  Christ 
intended  the  rite  as  one  of  his  church,  he  woukl,  in 
his  last  command,  have  inserted  a  specific  clause 
enjoining  it.  It  is  also  claimed  that,  had  Peter  so 
regarded  it,  he  would  not  have  put  the  command 
"  repent "  before  "  be  baptized,"  in  his  exhortation  to 
the  three  thousand.  But  these  conclusions  do  not, 
by  any  means,  follow  as  we  shall  see : — ■ 

(1).  That  command  of  Christ  is  so  brief  and,  at 
the  same  time,  so  general  and  comprehensive,  that 
such  specifications  would  not  be  likely  to  be  made. 
They  were  not  needed,  as  we  shall  see.  Its  interpre- 
tation depends,  not  upon  the  absence  of  such  a  speci- 
fication, but  upon  the  identity  of  circumcision  and 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  163 

baptism,  including  infant — its  form  as  well  as  sub- 
stance. If  they  are  thus  identical,  as  will  be  proved, 
then  this  command  must  be  interpreted  accordingly. 
If  baptism  includes  both  the  form  and  substance  of 
infant,  as  practised  in  the  New  Testament  chui'ches, 
then  that  here  enjoined  by  Christ  must  include  the 
same.  If  God  had  said  to  his  chosen  people  through 
Moses,  upon  the  Mount,  as  he  virtually  did :  ''  Go 
among  all  other  peoples  and  induce  them  to  become 
my  believing  children  with  you,  so  far  as  you  can; 
circumcising  them  into  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Spirit.  He  that  believeth  and  is  circum- 
cised, shall  be  saved ;  but  he  that  believeth  not  and 
is  not  circumcised,  shall  be  condemned,"  no  one,  in 
view  of  the  proper  subjects  of  that  ancient  rite  as 
instituted  by  God,  would  fail  to  see  that  this  sup- 
posed command  enjoined  the  giving  of  the  rite  to  the 
children  of  all  those  who  became  God's  believing 
ones  as  well  as  to  their  parents  themselves.  Had 
Christ  commanded  his  disciples,  as  he  virtually  did, 
saying :  "  Go  make  disciples  of  all  nations,  teaching 
them  to  pray  Avith  the  assurance  that  he  that  believ- 
eth and  prayeth  shall  be  saved,  but  he  that  believeth 
not  and  doeth  not  pray,  shall  be  condemned,"  we 
should  know  that  the  command  included  the  teach- 
ing their  children  in  their  earliest  childhood,  to  take 
postures,  and  repeat  words  of  prayer.  We  should  be 
forced  to  this  conclusion  by  what  we  know  to  be 
legitimately  included  in  making  nations  praying 
ones.i 


iThe  bearing  of  this  command  upon  the  Mode  question.   See  Appen- 
dix B. 


(^^ 


164  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

(2).  That  Christ  puts  the  clause,  "  Is  baptized," 
after  believeth,  is  exphiined  by  the  fact  that  he 
always  emphasizes  the  substance,  as  the  great  over- 
shadowing- element  in  a  rite.  The  fact  that  the  sub- 
stance  of  baptism  cannot  come  before,  but  must  in 
every  case  come  at  the  same  time  with,  believing ; 
the  fact  that  every  one  is  baptized  for  substance,  at 
the  moment  he  does  first  believe ;  the  fact  that  every 
believer,  when  professing  his  own  faith  and  accept- 
ing his  parental  baptism  as  his  own,  is,  by  so  doing, 
virtually  baptized,  in  form — all  these  facts  constitute 
a  good  and  sufficient  reason  why  he  puts  this  baptis- 
mal clause  after  believeth.  In  our  judgment,  the 
correct  rendering  of  Christ's  words  is  :  He  that  be- 
lieveth and  receiveth  that  washing  of  regeneration 
which  is  symbolized  by  water-baptism,  shall  be  saved ; 
but  he  that  believeth  not  and  does  not  receive  that 
washing  which  is  so  symbolized,  shall  be  condemned. 
This  rendering  explains  why  Christ  makes  both  be- 
lieving and  baptism  equally  essential  to  salvation. 
They  both,  therefore,  must  occur  at  the  same  time ; 
and  baptism  might  have  been  placed  before,  just  as 
well  as  after,  believeth. 

(3).  The  exhortation  of  Peter:  First,  "  Repent ;" 
second,  "  Be  baptized,"  is  local  in  form,  adapted  to 
the  peculiar  circumstances  of  those  addressed.  Being 
Jews,  no  one  of  them  had  received  baptism,  in  its 
Christian  form  in  infancy ;  and  it  was,  therefore, 
necessary  to  give  it  to  them  all  when  they  publicly 
professed  their  repentance  and  faith.  Hence,  the 
peculiar  local  form  of  the  exhortation.  He  saw  that 
they,  in  their  circumstances,  needed  first   to   repent 


SCRIPT tJRAL   ARGUMENT.  165 

and  then  receive  the  new  form,  baptism,  not  before 
received,  as  a  symbol  of  their  repentance,  and  he 
urged  them  accordingly. 

3.  Infant  Baptism,  in  its  Abrahamic  form,  circum- 
cision, is  certainly  found  in  the  Christian  church 
during  all  that  part  of  her  history  covered  by  the 
New  Testament. 

This  is  one  of  the  especially  important  points  in 
the  Scriptural  Argument,  because  of  the  formidable 
objection  it  removes,  and  the  great  difficulties  it 
takes  out  of  the  way.  It  effectually  refutes  the 
great  objection  urged,  that  infant  baptisms  are  not 
found  in  the  New  Testament. 

The  Identity  of  Christian  Baptism  and  Circum- 
cision^ the  Foundation-stone  of  this  Point. — This  point 
comes  legitimately  from  the  proved  identity  of  the 
two  rites.  By  reason  of  that,  the  first  is  and  must 
be  another  form  of  the  second,  and,  so  one  is  neces- 
sarily found  wherever  the  other  is  found.  Hence, 
if  infant  circumcisions  are  found  in  the  apostolic 
churches,  it  follows  that  infant  baptisms,  real,  bona- 
fide  infant  baptisms,  are  also  found  there  in  their 
ancient  forms.  This  follows  with  equal  certainty, 
even  if  they  are  not,  and  are  never  to  be,  found  there 
in  their  Christian  forms.  We  have,  as  we  claim, 
fully  demonstrated  the  identity  of  the  two  rites,  and 
therefore,  have  only  to  show  that  circumcision  was 
practised  in  those  churches,  to  establish  this  point 
now  before  us. 

(1).  It  is  unquestionably  true  that  circumcision, 
together  with  the  entire  Mosaic  ritual  were,  more  or 
less,  observed  without  rebuke  from  Christ  and  his 


166  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

apostles,  and  so,  with  their  approval,  in  the  Chris- 
tian churches,  by  Jeivisli  believers,  during  the  min- 
istries of  John  the  Baptist,  Christ,  and  also  his 
apostles,  down  to  the  time — doubtless  much  farther 
— of  the  violent  seizure  of  the  apostle  Paul,  when 
fulfilling  the  vow  of  a  Nazarite.  The  Saviour  never 
forbade  their  observance,  but,  on  the  contrary, 
observed  them  himself.  He  and  his  apostles  cen- 
sured their  abuse,  and  certain  incorrect  ideas  of 
them,  but  never  their  right  use.  He,  his  apostles, 
and  all  other  Jewish  disciples  were  circumcised. 
He  attended  the  great  sacrificial  feasts;  and  with 
ardent  desire  kept  the  Passover,  in  the  use  of  the 
paschal  lamb,  bread,  and  cup,  the  night  before  he 
suffered.  Peter  and  John  went  up  into  the  temple 
at  the  hour  of  prayer,  to  engage  in  the  prescribed 
service  of  that  hour — they  Avith  the  people  praying 
without,  while  the  priests,  within  the  holy  place, 
offered  sacrifices  as  symbolic  expressions  of  their 
prayers.  The  apostle  Paul  expressed  an  earnest  de- 
sire to  keep  the  feast  of  Pentecost.  He  observed,  as 
just  intimated,  the  ritual  service  of  the  Nazarite  vow. 
All  these  services,  by  devout  Jewish  believers,  were 
sincere,  spiritual,  and  a  means  of  grace ;  otherwise 
they  surely  would  have  been  prohibited  b}''  Christ. 

(2).  It  follows,  then,  that  Infant  Baptism,  in  its 
Abrahamic  form,  w^as  certainly  observed  by  Jewish 
believers  in  the  infancy  of  the  Christian  church. 
This  fact  is  of  great  importance  to  this  argument. 
To  find  Infant  Baptism  in  the  earliest  Christian 
churches,  in  a  bonafide  and  a  divinely-appointed 
form,  circumcision,  is  indeed  a  great  point  gained. 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  167 

.  (3).  This  fact  gives  a  good  and  sufficient  reason 
why  there  are  no  records  of  any  Infant  Baptisms,  in 
their  Christian  forms,  among  Jewish  believers,  in 
the  ministries  of  John  the  Baptist,  Christ,  and  his 
apostles.  Such  were  not  called  for  because  Jewish 
believers  retained  and  with  divine  permission  gave 
the  Abrahamic  form  of  the  rite  to  their  children. 
All  their  circumcisions  administered  to,  or  by,  them- 
selves, when  in  unbelief,  were  invalid,  destitute  of 
life  ;  but  as  each  one  became  a  believer,  he,  by  so 
doing,  made  his  own  perfectly  valid  on  his  part; 
both  that  received  by  him  in  his  infancy,  from  his 
unbelieving  parents,  and,  also,  those  given  by  him, 
when  himself  in  unbelief,  to  his  children.  The 
moment  he  himself  received  the  new  life,  that 
moment  he  imparted  the  same  to  all  his  dead  cir- 
cumcisions, so  far  as  his  agency  was  concerned, 
hence  it  was  not  ahsolutely  essential  that  they 
should  be  repeated  in  their  Christian  forms.  It  was 
not  even  expedient  to  repeat  them  in  the  case  of 
their  children,  and,  for  that  reason,  they  were  not 
required  to  baptize  them,  in  form,  when  they  made 
their  own  profession  of  faith,  as  they  would  have 
been  had  they  not  been  circumcised.  But  it  was 
expedient  that  their  own  circumcisions  administered 
to  them  in  their  infancy  should  be  repeated  in  their 
Christian  forms,  and,  for  that  reason,  they  received 
baptism  when  they  made  public  profession  of  their 
faith.  They  were  baptized  in  the  new  form,  not 
because  their  lifeless  circumcisions  had  not  been 
made  living  ones,  by  their  faith,  but  because  it  was 
desirable  to  introduce,  as  rapidly  as  could  wisely  be 


168  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

done,  the  new  one,  as  better  fitted  and  actually 
appointed  for  the  Christian  church.  They  received 
the  new  form,  also,  because  the  old  had  become  so 
debased,  by  prostitution,  that  it  had  ceased  to  dis- 
tinguish believers,  as  such,  in  the  judgment  of  the 
world.  Circumcision,  as  a  symbol  of  God's  covenant 
in  respect  to  their  children,  was  not  debased  in  the 
same  sense,  nor  to  the  same  extent ;  hence  there  was 
not  the  same  expediency  to  repeat  it  in  their  case. 
Thus  the  forms  ran  along,  side  by  side,  among 
Jewish  believers,  for  a  brief  transition  period, — their 
children  baptized  only  in  their  circumcisions  ;  they 
themselves  re-circumcised  in  their  baptisms  when 
professing  their  faitli. 

(4).  The  same  was  true  of  the  sacramental  feasts 
of  the  two  dispensations.  In  them  the  Jewish  believ- 
ers continued  to  offer  their  usual  sacrifices  pointing 
to  Christ  crucified,  and  at  the  same  time  observed  the 
Lord's  Supper  pointing  to  the  same.  The  design  of 
God  doubtless  was  to  let  the  Jewish  disciples  gratify 
their  ardent  and  praiseworthy  attachment  to  the 
charming  ritual  of  their  revered  fathers,  until  their 
better  knowledge,  higher  spiritual  life,  and  fruitful 
evangelistic  work,  among  Jews  and  gentiles  alike, 
should  open  their  eyes  to  see  it  no  longer  necessary 
nor  desirable.  In  this  appears  the  great  love  and 
tender  sympathy  of  the  Good  Shepherd  for  the  weak 
and  tender  lambs  of  his  fold. 

4.  An  objection  to  the  identity  of  the  two  rites, 
claimed  to  be  derived  from  the  proceedings  of  the 
Council  at  Jerusalem,  about  A.  D.  50. 

It  is  asserted,  by  way  of  objection,  that  the  non- 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  169 

mention  of  tliis  identity  in  the  recorded  discussions 
and  result  of  that  council,  disprove  the  claim  that 
they  were  identical.  It  must  be  confessed  that  this 
does  furnish  an  objection  which,  at  first  sight,  seems 
to  be  somewhat  plausible,  so  far  as  it  respects  circum- 
cision. The  dispute  in  that  council,  composed  of  the 
apostles,  elders,  and  brethren,  had  respect  to  the 
observance  of  the  whole  Mosaic  ritual  by  gentile 
believers, — whether  or  not  they  should  be  required 
to  conform  strictly  to  every  one  of  its  requisitions. 
Now  it  is  certainly  true  that  the  alleged  identity  of 
the  two  rites  answers  that  question  in  the  negative, 
so  far  as  circumcision  is  concerned ;  and  it  might 
have  been  made  use  of  for  such  a  decisive  answer. 
Peter  and  James  had  only  to  say,  circumcision  and 
baptism  are  different  forms  of  the  same  rite.  Our 
gentile  believers  are  circumcised  in  their  baptisms, 
and,  therefore,  it  cannot  be  necessary  for  them  to  be 
re-circumcised  in  the  use  of  the  other  form.  We  must 
admit  that,  at  first  sight,  it  does  seem  strange  that 
they  did  not  make  use  of  it  for  that  purpose.  But, 
because  they  did  not,  must  we  conclude  that  they 
are  not  identical  ?  Does  that  necessarily  follow  ? 
We  will  reply  Avith  a  parallel  case  in  this  same 
council.  The  above  fact  was  not  the  only  one  be- 
fore them  which  would  have  settled  the  dispute  at 
once,  so  far  as  circumcision  was  concerned.  The  fact 
that  that  rite  was  not  actually  binding  upon  the  Jews 
themselves,  and  that  it  was  soon  to  cease  even  among 
them,  and  might  be  dispensed  with  immediately,  if 
they  only  had  knowledge  and  grace  enough  to  do  so, 
without  needless  harm, — that  fact,  also,  gave  a  like 


170  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

complete  solution  of  the  disputed  question  before 
them.  As  the  ancient  rite  was  not  necessarily  bind- 
ing upon  the  Jews  themselves,  and  was  so  soon  to 
pass  out  of  use  among  Christian  Jews,  it  certainly 
could  not  be  necessary  to  force  it  upon  the  gentile 
believers.  Why  did  not  the  apostles  make  use  of  this 
so  decisive  fact  to  remove  the  contention  troubling 
tliem  ?  It  does  indeed  seem  strange  that  they  did 
not.  Shall  we  then  conclude  that  the  alleged  fact 
was  not  a  real  one  ?  Shall  we  deny  the  claim  that 
circumcision  was  not  absolutely  binding  upon  the 
Jews  ?  Shall  we  repudiate  the  idea  that  it  was  soon 
to  cease  among  them  simply  for  the  reason  that  the 
apostles  did  not  make  such  a  use  of  it  ?  That  we 
cannot  do,  as  we  do  know  that  it  was  true.  This 
alleged  identity,  then,  for  the  like  reason,  may  be 
true,  notwithstanding  their  not  thus  making  use  of 
the  same.  This  objection,  professedly  derived  from 
the  proceedings  of  that  council,  can,  therefore,  have 
no  weight ;  especially  in  view  of  the  positive  reason 
for  this  identity  which  we  have  set  forth. 

Why  Not  so  Used? — They  may  not  have  thought  it 
expedient  so  to  use  it,  for  the  reason  that  it  could 
meet  but  one  of  their  many  difficulties.  It  only 
covered  the  case  of  circumcision,  while  the  question 
at  issue  covered  the  entire  Mosaic  ritual.  It  would 
have  availed  but  little  for  them  to  show  by  it  that 
that  one  of  the  ancient  rites  need  not  be  enforced, 
wliile  the  same  was  not,  also,  shown  of  all  the  other 
numerous  requirements.  It  may  be  that  they  did 
not  think  it  wise  to  publish  such  a  revolutionary 
truth  at  that  time,  in  vicAV  of  the  greatl}^  disturbed 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  171 

state  of  the  Jewish  mind,  resulting  from  the  radical 
change  of  forms  being  introduced.  In  their  recorded 
result,  they  manifest  an  earnest  desire  to  conciliate 
offended  brethren  and  to  avoid  inflicting  any  unneces- 
sary wounds.  Evidently  they  sought,  so  far  as  pos- 
sible, to  let  those  already  inflicted  remain  untouched, 
to  be  gradually  healed  by  the  recuperative  influences 
of  time  and  the  workings  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

5.'  It  is  objected  that  the  disparagement  placed  by 
the  apostle  upon  circumcision,  disproves  the  high 
honor  given  it  in  this  argument,  as  being  identical 
with  Christian  baptism. 

The  apostle  does,  indeed,  speak  disparagingly,  not 
of  the  divine-idea  rite,  but  of  it  as  perverted  by  the 
wicked  Jews.  He  writes  to  the  Galatians  :  If  ye  be 
circumcised,  Christ  shall  profit  you  nothing.  But  he 
cannot  mean  that  his  own  circumcision,  nor  that 
which  he  administered  to  Timothy,  shut  them  off 
from  all  profit  by  Christ.  He  rather  refers  to  the 
rite  as  claimed  to  be  an  act  meriting  salvation — a 
ground  of  justification  in  the  sight  of  God.  A  sin- 
ful man  relying  upon  either  that  or  baptism,  as 
having  such  a  meritorious  character,  does,  indeed,  by 
so  doing,  reject  Christ  as  his  justifying  Saviour,  and, 
of  course,  receives  no  profit  from  him.  For  a  like 
reason,  he  testifies  to  every  man  thus  circumcised ; 
that  he  is  a  debtor  to  do  the  whole  law.  In  claiming 
merit  for  that  one  act,  he  wholly  sets  aside  Christ 
and  so  must  have  a  perfect  righteousness  of  his  own 
to  secure  saving  justification.  Rut  this  certainly 
was  not  true  of  circumcised  Timothy.  A  confession 
of  oblioration  to  be  circumcised  involved  the  confessed 


172  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

obligation  to  observe  all  the  rites  and  ceremonies  of 
the  Mosaic  law.  In  the  same  chapter  (Gal.  5:  6)  he 
writes :  For  in  Christ  Jesus  neither  circumcision 
availeth  anything  nor  uncircumcision,  but  faith  which 
worketh  by  love.  The  same  is  true  of  baptism  and 
all  other  ordinance  forms.  To  the  saints  at  Rome  he 
writes  (Rom.  2  :  25)  :  For  circumcision  profiteth  if 
thou  keep  the  law ;  but  if  thou  be  a  breaker  of  the 
law,  thy  circumcision  is  counted  uncircumcision. 
The  same  is  true  of  every  rite  without  a  life  of  true 
obedience,  each  and  every  one  is  invalid.  Faith 
working  by  love  is  essential  to  the  vitality  of  them 
all. 

Peter  speaks  of  the  Jewish  ritual  as  a  j^oke  which 
neither  they  nor  their  fathers  were  able  to  bear.  In 
most  cases  such  forms  become  burdensome  sooner  or 
later.  This  must  inevitably  have  come  to  be  the 
case  in  time,  with  a  ritual  so  extensive,  costly,  and 
complicated  as  tiie  Mosaic.  This  resulting  burden- 
someness  incident  to  the  changing  circumstances  of 
succeeding  ages  was  largely  augmented  by  the  great 
mistake  of  the  Jews,  in  regarding  it  as  possessing 
cast-iron  inflexibility.  They  did  not  perceive  their 
own  mission  respecting  it,  viz.,  to  change  it  so 
far,  but  no  farther,  as  circumstances  required.  This 
liberty,  to  be  used  only  as  led  by  the  Spirit,  is  wisely 
given  by  God  to  his  people.  He  will  have  mercy 
and  not  sacrifice.  While  he  often  calls  them  to  lives 
of  much  suffering,  he  yet  does  not  doom  them  to 
galling  forms  as  acts  of  penance. 

Besides,  it  is  most  probable,  if  not  morally  certain, 
that  Peter's  main  reference  was  to  the  unauthorized 


SCRIPTURAL  argume:nt.  173 

traditions,  tauglit  and  rigidly  enforced  by  the  ruling 
Pharisees,  as  the  true  word  of  God  given  orally  to 
Moses,  and  to  be  sacredly  preserved  and  handed 
down  the  ages  through  a  divinely-constituted  hierach- 
ical  succession.  Those  traditions  were,  indeed, 
excessively  and  cruelly  burdensome  ;  a  galling  yoke 
which  neither  the  apostles  nor  their  fathers  were  able 
to  bear.^  Now  the  rigidly  conservative  Jewish 
Christians,  having  been  trained  to  their  observance 
as  most  sacred  and  of  the  most  solemn  obligation 
from  their  youth  up,  would  naturally,  as  they  actually 
did,  insist  upon  forcing  unrelentingly  this  same  hard 
yoke  and  these  same  crushing  burdens  upon  Gentile 
Christians.  It  must  have  been  chiefly,  if  not  exclu- 
sively, against  them  as  of  purely  human  and  wicked 
origin,  that  the  apostle  protested  so  earnestly. 
There  is  no  good  evidence  that  he  regarded  circum- 
cision, the  paschal  feast,  the  uncorrupted  temple 
ritual,  etc.,  etc.,  as  thus  oppressive — only  the  wicked 
traditions  of  the  elders. 

6.  The  New  Testament  contains  records  of 
infant  baptisms,  in  their  Christian  forms,  among 
Gentile  believers. 

We  have  now  learned  just  why  we  do  not  find  any 

1 "  It  was  an  article  of  faith  that  in  the  Pentateuch  there  was  no  pre- 
cept and  no  regulation,  ceremonial,  doctrinal,  or  legal,  of  which  God 
had  not  given  to  Moses  all  explanations  necessary  for  their  applica- 
tion, with  the  order  to  transmit  them  by  word  of  mouth.  It  was  not 
to  be  supposed  that  all  the  traditions  which  bound  the  Pharisees  were 
believed  to  be  direct  revelations  to  Moses  on  Mount  Sinai.  Viewed 
as  a  whole,  they  (the  Pharisees)  treated  men  like  children  formalizing 
and  defining  the  minutest  particulars  of  ritual  observances.  The  ex- 
pressions (New  Testament)  of  *' bondage,"  of  "weak  and  beggarly 
elements,"  and  of  "  burdens  too  heavy  for  men  to  bear,"  faithfully 
represent  the  impression  produced  by  their  multiplicity." — Dictionary 
of  the  Bible,  by  Dr.  William  Smith,  page  526. 


174  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

instances  of  infant  baptisms  in  their  Christian  forms 
among  Jewish  believers,  in  the  ministries  of  John 
the  Baptist,  Christ  and  his  apostles,  viz.:  Their  chil- 
dren received  them  in  their  Abrahamic  forms.  From 
this  fact  now  learned  we  may  know  just  where  to 
expect  to  find  them  in  their  Christian  forms,  viz. : 
Among  Gentile  believers  in  the  apostolic  churches ; 
for  the  reason  that  their  children  did  not  receive 
them  in  their  Abrahamic  forms. 

The  reasons  set  forth  why  baptism  was  not  then 
given  to  children  of  Jewish  believers  do  not  hold 
good  in  the  case  of  those  of  Gentile — the  latter  not 
receiving  the  rite  in  its  ancient  form.  Hence  they 
must  receive  it  in  its  Christian,  provided  Infant 
Baptism  is  a  divinely-appointed  ordinance  in  the 
Christian  church.  We  are  then  to  expect  to  find 
recorded  instances  of  them  among  Gentile  believers, 
and  among  them  alone.  We  will,  therefore,  now 
turn  our  eyes  in  that  direction  in  search  of  them. 
In  doing  this,  let  us  bear  in  mind  that  we  may  not 
expect  to  find  records,  which,  judged  each  one  by 
itself  alone,  without  reference  to  related  passages 
and  facts,  are  absolutely  decisive,  as  to  the  point  in 
dispute.  This  is  not  the  case,  even  in  scientific  doc- 
trinal treatises,  in  which  great  efforts  are  made  to 
have  all  statements  so  clear  and  exact  as  to  make 
their  true  import  at  once  unmistakable.  The  in- 
spired penmen  do  not  Avrite  as  special  advocates  or 
rejectors  of  the  rite,  whatever  may  have  been  their 
belief  respecting  it,  and  hence  cannot  be  supposed 
to  have  used  language  so  carefully  guarded,  as  to 
make  every  passage  describing,  or  merely  alluding 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  175 

to,  baptism,  perfectly  clear  and  decisive  upon  the 
point  before  us.  We  are,  therefore,  to  expect  to  find 
records  partaking  more  or  less  of  the  incomplete  and 
indefinite  as  to  this  point,  whose  full  and  exact 
meaning  must  be  ascertained  by  a  careful  examina- 
tion of  all  the  related  facts  and  statements  of  the 
Bible.  Their  interpretation  must,  to  a  great  extent, 
be  determined  by  that  which  corresponds  to  circum- 
stantial evidence  in  civil  courts. 

We  find  the  following,  which,  at  first  sight,  sug- 
gest infant  baptisms,  and,  for  this  reason,  call  for 
special  examination  :  "And  I  [Paul]  baptized  also 
the  household  of  Stephanas  "  (I  Cor.  1 :  16).  "And 
when  she  [Lydia]  was  baptized  and  her  household  " 
(Acts  16  :  15).  "And  was  baptized,  he  [the  jailor] 
and  all  his,  straightway"  (Acts  16  :  33). 

In  considering  these  records  as  indicating  the  sub- 
jects of  tlie  baptisms  recorded,  we  make  the  follow- 
ing points  : 

1.  They  were  all  Gentile  baptisms.  This  fact,  in 
its  bearing  uj^on  the  question,  is  a  very  significant 
one,  for  the  reason  that  it  is,  as  we  have  seen,  just 
what  the  rite  demands.  The  children  of  believing 
Jews  received  the  rite  in  its  Abrahamic  form,  and  so 
were  not  baptized  in  its  Christian,  but  those  of  Gen- 
tiles would  be.  Hence  Infant  Baptism  demands  that 
all  household  baptisms  of  those  times,  including 
those  of  infants,  should  be  Gentile  ones,  and  those 
alone. 

2.  The  phraseology:  Her  household.  All  his. 
The  household  of  Stephanas,  suggest  infant  bap- 
tisms.    They  especially  harmonize   with   the  claim 


176  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

that  there  were  such  in  them.  It  is  just  the  lan- 
guage we  should  expect  to  find,  on  the  supposition 
that  there  were.  It  is  a  noteworthy  fact,  and  one 
which  adds  great  force  to  this  suggestion,  that  while 
these  phrases  are  used  to  describe  Gentile,  they  are 
never  used  to  describe  Jewish,  baptisms.  This  nat- 
urally confirms  us  in  our  belief  that  the  children  of 
believing  Jews  were  baptized  only  in  their  circum- 
cisions during  that  brief  transition  period. 

3.  These  three  records  of  household  baptisms  con- 
stitute a  large  part,  nearly  one  half,  of  all  the  rec- 
ords of  Gentile  baptisms  found  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. There  are  but  seven  in  all.^  We  do  not 
mean  that  the  number  of  the  subjects  of  these  three 
bears  just  such  a  proportion  to  the  number  of  those 
of  the  entire  seven  records.  We  refer  to  the  com- 
parative number  of  occasions  recorded,  when  bap- 
tisms more  or  less  each  time  were  administered.  Is 
it  not  remarkable,  that,  in  three  sevenths  of  them  all, 
the  words  "  household "  or  "  all  his  "  are  used  to 
indicate  the  subjects  of  the  rite?  Is  it  not,  also, 
remarkable  that  these  households  were  all  baptized 
by  the  apostle  Paul,  the  great  apostle  to  the  Gen- 
tiles ?  Certainly  this  so  large  proportion  happily 
harmonizes  with  the  idea  that  they  included  infant 
subjects.  The  demands  of  the  rite  lead  us  to  expect 
just  such  a  large  proportion. 

4.  It  is  morally  certain  that,  among  the  numer- 
ous unrecorded  instances  of  Gentile  baptisms,  there 

1  The  recorded  instances  of  Gentile  baptisms  are  the  following: 
Acts  10:  47  (Cornelius  and  others);  16:  15  (Lydia  and  her  household)  16: 
33; (the  jailor  and  all  his)  18:8  (many  Corinthians);!  Cor.  1:14  (Crispus); 
1:  14  (Gaius);  1:  16  (the  household  of  Stephanas). 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  177 

was  a  like  proportion  of  household  ones.  All  the 
recorded  ones,  both  the  household  and  all  others 
together,  must  have  been  but  a  very  small  part  of 
those  administered.  The  number  of  household  ones 
recorded,  then,  must  also  have  been  a  very  small 
part  of  all  the  household  ones  administered.  It  is, 
therefore,  morally  certain  that  there  were  a  great 
many  such.  This  fact  is  of  great  weight  in  deter- 
mining their  character.  The  greater  their  number, 
the  greater  this  harmony  between  the  phraseology 
and  the  rite ;  the  more  fully  the  demands  of  the 
latter  for  Gentile  baptisms,  in  the  New  Testament, 
termed  household,  including  those  of  infants,  is 
met. 

5.  It  is  most  probable  that  many,  if  not  all,  of 
these  households  baptized  contained  children  too 
young  to  make  a  profession  of  their  own  faitli  by 
baptism.  Families  without  such  children  were  much 
less  known  then  than  now.  Instances  of  such  were 
very  rare  indeed,  for  the  reason  that  so  many  of  the 
married  children  remained  in  their  parental  homes  as 
members  of  the  same  families. 

6.  It  is  morally  certain  that  they  contained 
household  servants.  Families  of  position  like  those 
must  have  had  man}^  of  them,  as  was  usually  the 
case  ;  probably  the  children,  and  possibly  the  chil- 
dren's children,  of  their  servants.  All  such  servants 
with  their  children  occupied  the  dependent  and  sub- 
ject relation  of  children,  and,  as  such,  were  legiti- 
mate subjects  of  baptism. 

7.  The  supposition  that  all  the  children  and  ser- 
vants baptized  were  believers,  does  not  conflict  with 

13 


178  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

the  claim  that  they  were  subjects  of  Infant  Baptism, 
as  that  includes  the  believing  with  the  non-believing 
children  for  its  subjects. 

8.  It  is  exceedingly  improbable  that  all  the  chil- 
dren and  servants  in  those  houseliolds  were  believers. 
A  fact  so  very  surprising  would  probably  have  been 
mentioned.  The  records  themselves  give  no  intima- 
tion of  such  a  remarkable  fact.  The  language  implies 
that  Lydia  herself  was  a  believer,  but  makes  no  men- 
tion of,  nor  any  allusion  to,  the  faith  of  any  other 
one  of  her  household.  The  Authorized  Version  does, 
indeed,  speak  of  tlie  jailor  as  believmg  with  all  his 
house;  but  the  Revised  gives  a  different,  and  pre- 
sumedly a  more  correct,  rendering,  viz.:  "He  re- 
joiced with  all  his  house,  having  believed  in  God ; " 
that  is,  having  himself  believed.  Nothing  is  said  of 
the  believing  of  the  others.  The  absence  of  all  men- 
tion of,  or  reference  to,  the  faitli  of  any  excepting 
these  two — the  respective  heads  of  the  two  house- 
holds— and,  as  such,  authorized  to  baptize  their  chil- 
dren and  servants,  greatly  increases  the  improbability 
that  no  non-believing  children  were  baptized. 

9.  The  remarkable  coincidence  between  the  de- 
mands of  Infant  Baptism  and  the  time  and  nation- 
ality of  these  baptisms,  adds  immensely  to  the  prob- 
ability that  they  included  non-believing  children  as  a 
part  of  their  subjects. 

Its  theory,  as  we  have  seen,  demands  that  it  was 
first  practised  in  that  period  of  the  apostolic  age  in 
which  the  gospel  was  preached  to  the  Gentiles,  and 
only  in  that  period.  It  also,  as  we  have  seen, 
demands  that  it  was  practised  in  Gentile  households, 


SCRIPTUIIAL   ARGUMENT.  179 

and  in  them  alone.  That  was  just  the  time  of  these 
recorded  household  baptisms,  and  just  such  was  the 
nationality  of  their  subjects.  We  claim,  and  shall 
now  proceed  to  show,  that  this  so  very  striking  coin- 
cidence, in  view  of  all  the  related  facts  we  have  con- 
sidered, makes  it  morally  certain  that  they  included 
those  of  Infant  Baptism  as  a  part  of  their  subjects. 

Incidextal  Coincidences  :  The  Importance 
ATTACHED  TO,  BY  LOGICIANS. — Logicians  justly  at- 
tach a  great  deal  of  importance  to  incidental  coinci- 
dences as  corroborative  j)roof.  Very  much  is  made 
of  them  in  treatises  upon  the  genuineness  and  cred- 
ibility of  the  different  books  of  the  New  Testament. 
Independent  witnesses  giving  the  same  testimony, 
furnish  the  most  convincing  evidence.  Different 
rays  of  light  so  refracted  as  to  converge  upon  the 
same  point,  give  a  blazing  light  of  greatly-increased 
intensity;  and,  for  a  like  reason,  incidental  coinci- 
dences have  very  great  weight  in  an  argument.  This 
is  especially  true  of  the  remarkable  one  now  under 
consideration.  It  is  one  so  very  striking  and  signifi- 
cant, that  it  gives  us  moral  certainty  respecting  the 
subjects  of  those  baptisms. 

An  Illustration  furnished  hy  a  Sea  Voyage. — Several 
years  ago  the  writer  took  passage  in  a  ship  bound 
from  the  Port  of  Boston  to  Valparaizo  on  the  west. 
ern  coast  of  South  America.  The  ship's  chart  had 
upon  it  the  following  places  lying  along  our  contem- 
plated voyage :  Cape  Cod  ;  the  Gulf  Stream ;  Ber- 
muda Islands ;  the  Zones  of  the  Northeast  and 
Southeast  Trade  Winds ;  the  Latitudes  where  the 
Southern  Cross  and  Magellan  Clouds  would  be  seen 


180  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

at  certain  altitudes  ;  Cape  St.  Roque  ;  the  Port  of 
Rio  Janeiro  ;  the  Mouth  of  the  La  Plata ;  the  Falk- 
land Islands ;  Staten  Island ;  Cape  Horn,  etc.  In 
our  voyage  we  made,  or  might  have  made,  all  these 
places.  We  found,  or  might  have  found,  them  just 
where  the  chart  said  we  might,  without  one  single 
failure.  We  had,  then,  in  each  one  of  these  places 
thus  made  an  incidental  coincidence  between  the 
chart  and  the  discovered  places,  which  tended,  one 
after  another,  greatly  to  confirm  the  accuracy  of  the 
chart  and  strengthen  our  confidence  in  it  as  our 
guide  amid  all  the  perils  of  the  trackless,  ship-wreck- 
ing ocean,  where  our  security  would  depend  so  abso- 
lutely upon  the  truthfulness  of  that  guide.  As  we 
sailed  on  from  week  to  week,  each  succeeding  dis- 
covery of  a  place  just  where  the  chart  predicted 
made  us  much  more  sure  of  finding  the  next  in  order 
by  trusting  to  the  same  guidance.  This  assurance, 
derived  from  all  these  successive  coincidences,  and 
gaining  new  additional  strength  from  each  one,  also 
made  us  quick  to  detect  with  conscious  certainty  the 
places  predicted  when  as  yet  just  discerned  in  dim 
outline.  To  recognize  a  little  blue  object  on  the  dis- 
tant horizon — scarcely  distinguishable  from  the  blue 
sky  in  which  it  was  apparently  set — as  the  real  Ber- 
muda Islands,  we  did  not  need  wait  until  we  had 
sailed  so  near,  and  the  atmosphere  had  become  so 
clear  that  we  could  distinctly  see  its  harbor,  the 
trend  of  its  coast-line,  its  lighthouse,  its  well-known 
public  buildings,  its  hills  and  mountains.  We  were 
qualified  to  decide  the  question,  without  doubt  or 
hesitation,  simply  by  the  fact  that  the  chart  pointed 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  181 

to  that  very  object  as  being  the  spot  where  that 
island  is  located.  After  crossing  the  equatorial  line, 
and  many  da3^s  more  of  sailing  up  the  eastern  coast 
of  South  America,  we  found  ourselves,  one  very 
foggy  morning,  in  a  position  where  the  chart  bade  us 
look  for  Staten  Island  right  over  our  starboard  rail. 
While  we  all  stood  on  deck  watching  with  intense 
interest,  the  fog  became  so  much  rarified  as  to  bring- 
to  view  something  which  seemed  to  differ  a  little 
from  both  sea  and  sky — a  slight  suggestion  of  land, 
yet  resembling  that  island  about  as  much  as  a  single 
pale,  scarcely  distinguishable,  pigment  stain  looks 
like  a  well-known  landscape  painting.  Even  after 
the  fog  had  so  far  cleared  away  as  to  make  visible 
many  of  its  broken  outlines,  it  could  not,  so  far  as 
we  were  able  to  discern,  be  distinguished  from  ten 
thousand  other  islands  in  the  great  oceans.  And  yet 
at  the  first  dim  sight  of  this  something  which  looked 
as  if  it  might  possibly  be  land,  we  knew  for  certainty 
that  it  was  the  veritable  Staten  Island  itself,  simply 
because  our  chart,  which  had  shown  itself  correct  in 
case  of  all  the  places  previously  made  in  our  voyage, 
bade  us  look  to  that  locality  for  it.  Thus  the  chart's 
index-finger,  at  once  and  with  certainty,  transformed 
the  dim,  shadowy  object  into  the  island  itself. 

In  like  manner  we  have  been  making  a  lengthy 
voyage  upon  the  ocean  of  Bible-history,  in  search  of 
facts  involved  in  the  theory  of  Infant  Baptism.  Our 
ship's  chart  has  been  this  theory  as  set  forth  at  the 
commencement  of  this  treatise.  By  its  use  in  this, 
our  voyage  of  discovery,  its  truthfulness  was  destined 
to  be  established  by  our  finding,  or  disproved  by  our 


182  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

not  finding,  the  facts  it  pi'edicted.  That  theory 
claimed,  among  other  things,  the  following  Scriptural 
facts  as  its  sure  foundation :  An  adequate  Bible 
proof-text  given  to  Abraham ;  a  rite  embodying 
that  text;  this  rite,  circumcision,  binding  in  its  sub- 
stance everywhere  and  at  all  times,  but  changeable 
in  its  form ;  found,  with  its  related  church  and  cov- 
enant, in  other  forms  in  the  pre-Abrahamic  and  Chris- 
tian ages;  Christian  baptism  identical  with  circum- 
cision, differing  only  in  form;  no  Infant  Baptisms  in 
their  Christian  forms  among  Jewish  believers,  in  the 
ministries  of  John  the  Baptist,  Christ  and  his  apos- 
tles ;  the  essential  features  of  Infant  Baptism  cer- 
tainly in  the  Christian  church  ;  found  in  its  Abra- 
hamic  form  among  Jewish  believers  of  the  Christian 
churches  in  the  apostolic  age  ;  some  records  of  Infant 
Baptisms  in  their  Christian  forms  among  Gentile 
believers  in  the  apostolic  churches.  Such  the  chart. 
We  have  been  all  the  time  upon  a  careful  look- 
out for  these  facts  in  the  latitudes  and  longitudes 
named,  subjecting  the  claims  of  each  and  every  ap- 
parent one  presenting  itself  to  a  rigid  examination  ; 
and  have,  thus  far,  up  close  to  the  termination  of 
our  voyage,  found  every  single  one  of  them,  except- 
ing the  last,  in  just  the  time  and  place  predicted  by 
the  theory ;  and,  what  is  very  significant  and  of  very 
great  importance  in  tlie  case,  not  one  single  biblical 
fact  in  conflict  with  it.  This  one  solitary  exception 
is  here  reckoned  as  such  for  the  reason  that,  in  this 
review  voyage^  it  has  not  yet  been  found.  It  has 
already  been  found  by  a  careful  investigation ;  but 
we  have  not  yet,  from  our  vessel  deck,  turned  our 


SCKIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  183 

telescope  in  that  direction  in  search  of  it.^  It  is  the 
only  remaining  one  needed,  and  when  thus  found, 
will  take  its  place  as  the  capstone  of  the  completed 
argument. 

In  all  these  successive  facts  demanded,  which  Ave 
have,  thus  far,  discovered,  each  one  gave  assurance 
that  those  not  then  found  would  be,  at  the  time  and 
place  predicted ;  and  each  new-found  one,  at  once 
united  with  those  before  found,  in  giving  the  same 
assurance  ;  yet  one  of  a  magnitude  as  much  larger 
as  was  the  number  uniting  with,  and  thus  confirm- 
ing, it.  Hence  the  certainty  of  finding  the  unfound- 
ones  in  their  order,  grew  stronger  and  stronger,  as 
the  work  of  discovery  progressed.  It  follows,  there- 
fore, that  now,  when  only  one  remains  not  found,  all 
the  others,  as  thus  found,  unite  in  assuring  u^  that 
it  will  also  certainly  be,  just  when  and  where  the 
theory  bids  us  look  for  it.  Because  of  this  we  now 
turn  our  glass  in  the  direction  specified  with  the 
fullest  confidence  of  finding  it.  We  feel  morally 
certain  of  discovering  in  the  New  Testament  in- 
stances of  baptisms  so  suggestive  of  infant  ones  in 
Christian  forms  as  to  give  full  confirmation  of  the 
accuracy  of  the  theory  and  reasoning  which  demand 
them.  At  first  look,  lo  and  behold  the  following  sig- 
nificant statements :  "  And  she  [Lydia]  was  bap- 
tized and  her  household."     "And  was  baptized,  he 

^Before  embarking  at  Boston,  we  knew  the  existence  and  location  of 
Staten  Island;  but  we  did  not  knoAV  it  as  coincident  with  the  chart 
and  ship's  reckoning,  and,  as  such,  confirming  their  accuracy.  It 
could  not  be  thus  known  until  something,  in  dim  outline,  sugges- 
tive of  it,  was  actually  seen  by  us.  Till  then  it  was  unknown  and 
unfound. 


184  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

[the  jailor]  and  all  his,  straightway."  "  And  I  [Paul] 
also  baptized  the  household  of  Stephanas — all  of 
them  Gentiles."  "All  by  the  great  apostle  to  the 
Gentiles."  Now  we  ask,  is  it  not  most  remarkable 
that  we,  trusting  implicitly  to  a  theory  already  con- 
firmed by  so  many  previous  decisive  facts,  and  look- 
ing just  where  directed  by  it,  should  at  once  find 
baptisms,  the  inspired  descriptions  of  which  are  so 
suggestive  of  those  including  infant  ones  ?  In  view 
of  it,  what  other  conclusion  can  we  possible  come  to 
than  that  they  are  just  such  as  the  theory  predicts? 
They  are  so  very  significant  that  the  very  first  glance 
satisfies  us.  There  is  little  if  any  fog  obscuring  this 
baptism  island.  We  see  phraseology  suggestive  of 
infant  baptisms  as  clearly  and  distinctly  discernible 
as  the  stars  in  the  blue  sky.  As  we  now  stand  look- 
ing with  pleasing  emotions,  all  the  previously  con- 
sidered facts  pointing  to  them  as  including  such 
baptisms  come  pouring  in  upon  us  like  the  light 
streaming  from  the  midday  sun.  Now  when  we 
have,  in  addition  to  all  these  great  and  decisive  pre- 
viously-secured evidences,  this  so  very  great  one, 
derived  from  such  a  remarkable  coincidence,  how 
can  we  avoid  the  conclusion  that  the  so  suggestive 
baptisms  which  we  now  have  just  got  a  sight  of,  do, 
indeed,  include  those  of  infant  children  as  predicted 
by  the  theor}^  ? 

The  reader  will  not  fail  to  perceive  the  great 
detriment  the  argument  for  this  rite  has  received 
from  the  supposition  generally  held,  that  all  Jewish 
believers  in  the  ministries  of  John  the  Baptist,  Christ 
and   his   apostles,   actually  did   give    baptism  in  its 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  185 

Christian  form  to  their  infant  children.  In  that 
case,  the  rite  stands  confronted  with  the  fatal  fact 
that  the  New  Testament  co7itains  no  one  single 
record  of^  or  slightest  allusion  to,  such  baptisms. 
The  phrase  household  baptism  is,  in  no  instance, 
used  to  describe  Jewish  baptisms  in  all  those  min- 
istries. On  the  supposition  adopted  in  this  treatise 
we  do  find  them  in  great  numbers  among  both  Jews 
and  Gentiles,  just  where  we  ought  to  expect  to  do 
so.  We  find  them  among  Jews  in  their  ancient 
forms,  and  among  Gentiles  in  their  later  ones ;  but, 
on  this  opposite  supposition,  we  do  not  find  even  one 
mention  or  suggestion  of  one,  just  where  we  ought 
to  find  many — among  Jewish  believers.  A  supposi- 
tion that  involves  such  great  difficulties,  not  to  say 
absurdities,  can  but  be  very  detrimental  to  the  argu- 
ment. In  view  of  this  absence  of  any  such  records 
and  allusions  it  requires  a  great  deal  of  positive 
proof  to  justify  the  claim  that  there  were  any.  It 
will  not  do  to  infer  that  there  were  right  in  the  face 
of  their  non-mention,  simply  from  the  fact  that  some 
theory  of  the  rite  demands  it.  If  the  Scriptures 
spoke  of  household  baptisms  among  Jews,  or 
made  use  of  any  other  phraseology  suggestive  of 
Infant  Baptisms  among  them,  then  the  demands  of 
the  generally-accepted  theory  would  make  that 
claim  very  plausible.  As  they  do  not,  such  demands 
cannot  make  it  at  all  probable.  In  such  circum- 
stances, the  claim  must  have  positive,  conclusive 
proof.     Nothing  short  of  that  will  satisfy. 

Proselyte  Baptisms. — Efforts   have  been   made   to 
show  that  proselyte  baptisms  furnish  this  proof.     It 


186  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

is  claimed  tiiat  such  were  known  and  practised  in 
those  ministries.  As  proselyte  baptisms,  including 
those  of  infants,  were  somewhat  common  in  the 
second  century,  it  is  inferred  that  they  were  so  in 
Christ's  ministry  and,  therefore,  that  Infant  Baptisms 
were  also  practised  by  Jewish  believers.  But  it  is 
far  from  being  certain  that  proselyte  baptisms  were 
known  as  early  as  the  middle  of  the  first  century. 
No  historian  of  that  time,  and  no  writings  then 
extant,  now  in  our  possession,  make  any  mention  of 
them.  The  Talmudists  of  the  second  century  do, 
indeed,  represent  them  as  practised  in  the  first  and 
many  previous  centuries ;  but  their  authority  as 
histories  is  not  regarded  as  very  reliable.  Their 
rejDresentation  just  mentioned  is  not  supported  by 
any  sufficient  proof,  and  is  opposed  by  this  so  signifi- 
cant silence  of  all  co-temporary  historians  and  writ- 
ings. Dr.  Wm.  Smith,  in  his  Bible  dictionary  pp. 
553-4,  concludes  from  the  evidence  for  and  against, 
as  follows :  ''  (1)  There  is  no  direct  evidence  of  the 
practice  being  in  use  before  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem. (2)  The  negative  argument  drawn  from  the 
silence  of  the  Old  Testament,  of  the  Apocrypha,  of 
Philo,  and  of  Josephus,  is  almost  decisive  against 
the  belief  that  there  was,  in  their  time  (of  John, 
Christ,  and  the  apostles)  a  baptism  of  proselytes  with 
as  much  importance  attached  to  it  as  we  find  in  the 
Talmudists." 

Knapp,  after  a  careful  examination  of  the  subject, 
concludes  as  follows :  "  But  though  much  may  be 
advanced  in  favor  of  this  opinion,  it  cannot  be  relied 
upon  with  certainty,  since  it  is  entirely  destitute  of 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  187 

contemporary  evidence."^  Bat  if  the  baptism  of  the 
children  of  proselytes  tvas  then  knoivn^  it  by  no 
means  necessarily  follows  that  John  administered 
the  rite  to  the  children  of  those  baptized  by  him ; 
nor  that  Christ  enjoined  their  baptism  in  its  Chris- 
tian form  upon  the  believing  Jews  in  his  ministry. 
Such  far-fetched  inferences  are  always  hazardous^ 
and  never  much  reliable.  They  rest  upon  two  un- 
proved claims,  viz.,  (1)  That  proselyte  baptisms 
were  then  common,  (2)  and  that  it  must  follow  that 
like  ones,  as  to  their  subjects,  must  have  been  ad- 
ministered by  John  and  Christ.  The  fallacy  of  the 
reasoning  appears  from  these  unstable  rocks  upon 
which  it  is  built.  At  best  such  baptisms  could  fur- 
nish only  a  small  probability,  and  that  far  too  slight 
to  overcome  the  very  great  counter  one  arising  from 
the  utter  absence  of  all  mention  of,  and  of  all  allu- 
sion to,  any  in  the  records  of  the  New  Testament. 
It  is  evident,  then,  that  Infant  Baptism,  if  it  must 
carry  the  supposition  that  it  was  practised  in  Chris- 
tian form  by  Jewish  believers  in  those  ministries, 
has  a  very  heavy  burden  to  bear. 

The  Abrahamic  Forms  of  these  Institiitions  still 
exist  in  the  Christian  Age  with  all  their  Original 
Authoritf/  and  Power. — We  have,  in  this  and  pre- 
vious parts,  considered  the  identity  of  these  Abra- 
hamic and  Christian  Institutions,  and,  in  doing  this, 
we  have  spoken  of  the  outward  forms  of  the  form  er- 
as laid  aside,  and,  consequently,  not  made  use  of  in 
the  Christian  Age.  In  an  important  sense  they  have 
been  and  so  are  not  now  in  use  ;  but  in  another  equal- 

iKnapp's  Christian  Theology,  p.  485. 


188  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

ly  important  sense  they  have  not  rightly  been  laid 
aside,  and  are,  or  ought  to  be,  made  use  of  by  Chris- 
tian believers.  They  by  no  means  have  been  done 
away,  but  still  exist  as  God's  instruments  in  per- 
fecting his  churches.  To  a  large  extent  their  form- 
functions  have  been  transferred  to  their  correspond- 
ing Christian  forms,  but  far  from  being  entirely  so. 
Like  their  essential  features,  they  have  in  an  impor- 
tant sense  permanent  existence  and  unceasing  bind- 
ing power  in  all  the  Christian  churches  of  the  earth. 
They  are  like  aged  soldiers  put  upon  the  retired 
list,  but  still  occupying  subordinate  posts  of  duty. 
They  belong,  all  the  same,  to  the  army,  and  still  do 
important  service. 

1.  They  certainly  have  a  permanent  existence 
historically.  As  facts  of  history  they  can  never  be 
done  away  nor  cease  to  exist.  No  fact  of  history  can 
possibly  be.  Once  such,  always  such,  always  the 
self-same  fact;  immortal  as  the  undying  soul  of 
man. 

2.  They  exist  in  all  Christian  churches  as  divinely- 
commissioned,  and  very  influential,  teachers  of 
God's  truth.  Circumcision,  for  instance,  is  seen 
to-day  in  the  same  starry  constellation  with  the  bQw 
in  the  cloud,  and  all  other  sacred  symbols  of  the 
past.  It  still  proclaims,  with  stirring  eloquence,  its 
great  truths,  speaking  in  God's  name,  as  all  having 
ears  to  hear  well  know.  It  is  now,  as  it  always  has 
been  and  always  will  be,  God's  blessed  evangel 
preaching  day  and  night  the  gospel  of  repentance 
and  promise.  That  sacredness  and  charm  which  was 
imparted  to  it  by  being  given  to  the  Divine  Child, 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  189 

while  yet  the  glad  songs  of  the  angelic  hosts  over 
his  birth  had  scarcely  died  away,  glorified  it,  has 
been  glorifying  it  more  and  more  ever  since,  and  will 
continue  to  do  so,  with  ever-increasing  power,  unto 
the  perfect  day. 

The  same  is,  also,  true  of  the  Abrahamic  church 
and  covenant  considered  as  historic  facts.  They 
still  live  in  their  ancient  forms  as  well  as  their 
essential  features.  They  now  exist  with  much,  if 
not  all,  of  their  original  power  and  influence  as  di- 
vinely- appointed  ordinances. 

3.  These  their  forms  so  exist  in  the  sense  that 
those  Jews  who  now  receive  the  rite  and  claim  cove- 
nant membership  in  that  church  and  covenant,  are 
bound  by  all  those  peculiar  obligations  imposed  upon 
their  fathers  of  old.  Those  Abyssinian  Christians 
who  now  practise  circumcision  by  so  doing  place 
themselves  under  greater  obligations  to  comply  with 
the  substance  of  every  one  of  its  original  require- 
ments. Now  it  cannot  be  said  of  forms  still  thus 
imposing  their  peculiar  obligations,  that  they  do  not 
exist  as  forms.  Forms  cannot  be  dead  which  mani- 
fest so  much  vitality  when  so  used.  Their  death  is 
simply  a  change,  to  some  extent,  in  the  methods  of 
their  use.  Like  the  saintly  Abel,  dead,  but  yet 
speaking.  In  some  of  their  functions,  they  are  still, 
and  ever  will  be,  on  active  duty,  never  before  so 
influential  for  good,  when  rightly  apprehended  and 
improved,  as  now.  They  are  destined  to  continue 
more  and  more  so  till  time  shall  end. 


CHAPTER    XII. 

Pakt  Sixth. 

CONCLUDING  POINTS. 

I.  The  Striking  Contrasts. — The  study  which  we 
have  now  given  to  the  history  of  the  Church  of  God 
running  from  her  primeval  fountain  in  Eden  down  all 
through  the  succeeding  ages,  to  the  close  of  the  apos- 
tolic, has  called  our  wondering  attention  to  the  strik- 
ino-  contrasts  between  the  rites  and  ceremonies  of  the 
Abrahamic  and  Christian  churches.  In  the  former 
these  are  numerous,  costly,  showy,  and  intensely 
grand.  In  the  latter  few,  simple,  plain — most  im- 
pressively grand  in  the  great  truths  set  forth  by 
them,  but  not  largely  so  in  their  forms.  In  passing 
from  the  first  into  the  last,  we  leave  dazzling  splendor 
of  forms  behind,  and  enter  into  chaste  simplicity  of 
rituals  and  ceremonies,  in  all  religious  worship.  A 
little  reflection  sliows  the  great  appropriateness  of 
such  a  change, — just  such  as  the  new  circumstances 
demand.  In  a  dispensation  immediately  preceding 
the  advent  of  Christ  they  would,  of  course,  as  they 
did,  point  to  the  Messiah  promised,  and  they,  there- 
fore, should  be  as  they  Avere,  so  shaped  as  happily  to 
picture  his  character  and  work.  They  would  thus 
be  the  forerunners  and  heralds  of  the  predicted  glo- 
rious King: — the  Desire  of  all  nations.  Called  to  fill 
such  a  high  office,  it  was  meet  that  they  be  glorious 
in  their  apparel.     Dazzling  splendor  of  forms,  as  well 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  191 

as  inexpressible  grandeur  of  thought,  should  be  theirs. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  such  sensuous  magnificence 
would  be  wholl}^  out  of  place  in  the  presence  of  the 
King  himself,  arra3^ed  in  a  splendor  infinitely  greater 
and  higher ;  compared  with  which  that  of  the  former 
is  as  a  dim  taper  to  the  blinding  effulgence  of  the 
midday  sun.  In  a  sunless  night,  it  is  fitting  that 
the  blushing  moon  should  sit  in  queenly  state  upon 
her  starry  throne  in  the  heavens,  pale  empress  of  the 
night,  and  sweetly  shine  in  her  charming  beauty ;  that 
the  stars  should  show  themselves  studding  the  blue 
sky,  glittering  and  sparkling  like  lustrous  diamonds 
— the  admiration  and  the  joy  of  all  beholders  ;  that, 
the  floating  clouds,  first  to  herald  his  approach, 
should  be  decked  in  their  gorgeous  morning  robes ; 
that  the  brows  of  the  lofty  mountains,  catching  the 
first  glimpses  of  his  approaching  chariot  of  fire,  should 
be  all  radiant  with  J03^ful  smiles  ;  that  thus  moon, 
stars,  clouds,  and  towering  mountain  peaks,  the  last 
two  made  especially  glorious  by  his  dawning  light, 
should  together  shout  for  joy  in  welcome  of  their  re- 
turning sovereign,  the  king  of  day.  But  when  he 
himself,  decked  in  his  royal  robes  of  light,  emerges 
from  his  resplendent  chamber  in  the  east,  rejoicing 
as  a  strong  man  to  run  his  race  ;  when  he  has,  in- 
deed, thus  presented  himself  in  glorious  state  above 
the  glowing  horizon ;  then  it  becomes  the  blushing 
moon  to  veil  herself,  the  streaming  stars  to  retire 
from  sight,  the  splendor-arrayed  clouds  and  the  blaz- 
ing mountain  peaks  to  lay  aside  their  gorgeous  robes 
of  golden  hue,  and  leave  their  kingly  sun,  alone  to 
flood  the  earth  with  his  own  life-giving,  heart-cheer- 


192  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

ing  light.  For  a  like  reason,  all  that  is  so  dazzling 
and  splendid  in  the  rites  and  ceremonies  of  the  Abra- 
hamic,  would  be  also  out  of  place  in  those  of  the 
Christian,  dispensation.  When  once  the  whole  earth 
was  flooded  with  the  sublime  presence  and  transcend- 
ent glory  of  the  great  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of 
lords  ;  when  the  angels  shouted  for  joy  over  His 
birth  at  Bethlehem,  and  the  Spirit-dove  descended 
upon  him  at  his  baptism  ;  when  he  reassumed 
something  of  his  laid-aside,  heavenly  glory  on  the 
mount  of  his  transfiguration  ;  when,  most  glorious 
and  God-like  of  all  the  eartly  manifestations  of  him- 
self, that  divinest  of  all  prayers  went  forth  from  his 
loving  heart  and  dying  lips  to  his  Father  in  heaven, 
"  Father  forgive  them,  for  they  know  not  what  they 
do  ;  "  when  he  had  entered  upon  his  work  of  redemp- 
tion, emblasoned  with  such  unspeakable  glories, — 
then  there  could  properly  remain  as  symbols  of  him, 
after  a  brief  period  of  transition,  only  a  few  plain, 
unadorned  sacraments,  like  baptism  and  the  Holy 
Supper. 

n.  Wise  and  Kind  3IetJiods  of  Transition. — An- 
other notewortli}^  fact  is  the  wise  and  kind  methods 
made  use  of  to  accomplish  this  great,  difficult,  yet  nec- 
essary, change.  To  the  Jew,  the  rites  and  ceremonies 
of  his  church  were  dear  as  the  apple  of  his  eye.  They 
were  bound  up  in  their  inmost  hearts,  and  were  pre- 
cious beyond  expression.  They  had  learned  to  love 
them  from  their  infancy.  The}^  were  thrilled  with  the 
fascinating  charm  of  their  splendid  ritual,  profoundly 
impressed  with  the  subduing  awe  of  its  imposing 
grandeur.     To   the    devout   ones,  who   revered   and 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  193 

observed  them,  in  their  true  spiritual  character,  the 
thought  of  their  being  set  aside  would  have  been 
most  painful  and  shocking ;  and  the  same  would  be 
true  of  the  hypocritical  ones,  whose  attachment  to 
them,  while  largely  superstitious,  was  yet  exceeding- 
ly strong.  Never  were  a  people,  one  and  all,  more 
completely  bound,  hand  and  foot,  to  their  religious 
observances,  by  the  strong  cords  of  sincere  piety,  or 
the  galling  chains  of  superstition,  than  were  the 
Jews  when  Christ  came  to  inaugurate  his  New  Dis- 
pensation, in  which  this  their  so  precious  ritual  was 
to  be  superseded  by  another  most  diverse  in  form. 
The  problem,  then,  was  how  to  bring  about  this  so 
painful  substitution,  with  tlie  least  possible  amount  of 
wounds  inflicted,  and  of  conflict  engendered. 

An  Ayialogy  from  the  Orchard. — The  orchardist, 
in  changing  the  fruit  of  a  tree  by  grafting,  does  not 
cut  off,  and  put  scions  into  all  its  limbs  the  first  sea- 
son, as  that  would  greatly  impair  its  vitality,  if  not 
destroy  its  life ;  but  he  then  grafts  only  a  few  of 
them,  and  then  waits  a  year  or  more  until  the  scions 
put  in  have  acquired  some  growth  and  vigor.  He 
then  cuts  off  and  grafts  a  few  more ;  and,  again,  for 
the  same  reason,  waits  until  the  next  season,  and 
so  on,  adding  some  each  successive  season,  until  the 
change  is  fully  accomplished,  with  only  slight  and 
temporary  shocks  to  its  vitality.  With  a  like  wis- 
dom the  tender-hearted  Saviour  wrought  the  great 
transition  under  consideration.  He  did  not  com- 
mence his  ministry  with  professedly  abolishing  Jew- 
ish sacrifices,  nor  by  distinctly  predicting  their  speedy 
displacement  in  forms.  Had  he  done  that,  instead 
14 


194  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

of  waiting  three  years  for  his  cross,  he  would,  doubt- 
less, have  had  it  in  as  many  weeks,  if  not  days.  On 
the  contrary,  he  publicly,  in  his  one  greatest  and  most 
representative  sermon,  took  special  pains  to  declare 
that  he  came  not  to  destroy  the  law  nor  the  prophets, 
but  to  fulfil  them.  In  instituting  the  Lord's  Supper, 
he  did  not  say,  nor  even  intimate,  that  it  was  des- 
tined soon  to  supplant  their  sacrifices  ;  rather,  both 
by  his  previous  observance  of  them,  and  by  this  his 
silence,  bade  the  believing  Jews  keep  on  observing 
them  devoutly,  leaving  it  to  the  out-goings  of  their 
new  life,  under  divine  guidance,  to  lead  them  to  give 
them  up  cheerfully,  as  the  wisdom  and  necessity  of 
doing  so  should  be  revealed  to  them  by  God's  spirit 
and  his  providential  workings.  So  Avith  baptism. 
Christ  did  not  enjoin  infant  baptism  in  its  Christian 
form  upon  his  Jewish  disciples.  Had  he  done  that, 
the  Jews  would  have  at  once  seen  in  it  the  intended 
supplanting  of  their  precious  rite  ;  and  the  conse- 
quences must  have  been  an  early  disastrous  con- 
flict. Had  he  thus,  or  in  any  other  way,  inti- 
mated the  laying  aside  of  that  rite  at  the  begin- 
ning of  his  ministry,  it  is  difficult  to  suppose  that 
he  could  have  secured  one  single  follower,  unless  by 
means  far  more  efficacious  than  those  which  he,  in 
his  wisdom,  did  use.  He  took  the  wiser  and  kinder 
way  of  confining  baptisms  to  Jewish  believers^  leav- 
ing circumcision  to  continue  its  legitimate  and  holy 
work  with  their  children  until  the  time  was  ripe  for 
the  complete  change. 

III.    Certain  Importayit    Practical     Questions   and 
Ansivers. — As    our   last   concluding   point,   we    will 


SCRIPTUKAL   ARGUMENT.  195 

consider  some  important  questions  suggested  by  this 
Scriptural  argument  as  thus  far  presented,  and  give 
to  them  carefully  stated  answers. 

1.  What  shall  a  man  do,  when  professing  his  faith, 
in  case  he  is  uncertain  whether  or  not  he  was  bap- 
tized by  his  parents? 

Not  absolutely  necessary,  yet  better,  that  he  be 
baptized.  Preferable  to  be  certain  that  he  has 
received  the  rite  in  form  as  well  as  substance.  If  a 
re-baptism,  no  harm  need  come  from  it,  in  the  circum- 
stances. On  the  other  hand,  if  he  feels  an  assurance 
sufficient  to  lead  him  not  to  receive  it,  relying  upon 
his  mistaken  belief  that  he  did  in  his  infancy,  no 
harm  need  come  from  his  thus  not  receiving  it  at  all, 
as  he  certainly  has  received  its  substance. 

2.  What  shall  a  church  do,  in  case  a  conscientious 
believer  in  her  membership,  or  seeking  admission  to 
it,  is  dissatisfied  with  his  parental  baptism? 

If  he  cannot,  by  wise  and  kind  help,  become  sat- 
isfied, then  baptize  him.  He  who  will  have  mercy 
and  not  sacrifice  surely  will  not  deny  him  this  privi- 
lege. As  before  shown,  it  is  perfectly  suicidal  for 
advocates  of  infant  baptism  to  maintain  that  re-bap- 
tisms are  never  admissible. 

3.  What  shall  a  man  do  who  becomes  convinced 
that  neither  of  his  parents  nor  tlie  minister  were  true 
believers  when  baptizing  him  ? 

As  to  their  being  real  believers,  no  subject  of  bap- 
tism can  be  absolutely  certain.  The  question,  then, 
is  one  of  vital  concern  to  every  baptized  person. 
The  answer  is  evident :  Such  a  one  has  no  reason  to 
be  dissatisfied  with,  much  less  troubled  about,   his 


196  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

baptism.  Its  validity,  so  far  as  he  himself  is  con- 
cerned, depends  solely  upon  his  own  personal  faith. 
A  man  takes  a  loyal  citizen's  oath,  but  the  magis- 
trate administering  it  acts  with  a  disloyal  heart. 
The  oath,  consequently,  on  the  part  of  the  latter,  is 
nothing  but  a  lifeless  form  ;  but,  on  his  own  part,  it 
is  a  living  one.  His  own  loyalty  makes  it  such.  It 
matters  not  that  the  magistrate  remains  unchanged  ; 
his  own  loyalty  is  all  that  is  needed  to  make  it  his 
real  and  sufficient  oath.  So  one's  own  true  faith 
gives  life  to  a  baptism,  which,  as  administered  to 
him  by  unbelieving  parents  and  minister,  is  a  mere 
lifeless  thing  on  their  part. 

4.  What  shall  a  man  do  who  was  baptized  on  pro- 
fession of  his  faith,  but  afterwards  became  convinced 
that  he  was  not  a  true  believer  when  baptized,  and  has 
since  become  one  ?     Must  he  receive  the  rite  again  ? 

Not  necessarily.  His  subsequent  faith  makes  his 
former  dead  baptism  a  living  one,  and,  therefore,  it 
is  not  necessary  for  him  to  receive  its  form  a  second 
time. 

5.  Are  the  non-believing  subjects  of  infant  baptism 
legitimate  members  of  the  church  baptizing  them? 
Does  their  baptism  really  induct  them  into  it  ? 

No.  Only  true  believers  can  be.  The  great  and 
the  absolutely  essential  idea  of  a  church  member  is 
one  in  mutual  loving  covenant  with  his  God.  This 
cannot  possibly  be  true  of  infants  too  young  to  be 
moral  agents;  nor  of  those  old  enough  to  be,  if  desti- 
tute of  real  love  for  him.  It  is  most  absurd,  then,  to 
claim  church  membership  for  them  before  believing. 

The    claimed    church    membership    of    believers' 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  197 

children  necessitates  their  regeneration.  Those 
accepting  it  are  logically  compelled  to  maintain 
their  regeneration  as  so  general  as  to  give  the  pre- 
sumption, in  the  case  of  each  one,  that  he  was  regen- 
erated in  infancy,  and  so  entitled  to  be  considered 
such  until  evidence  to  the  contrary  is  furnished. 
That  granted,  they  may  all  be  enrolled  as  members. 
But  as  long  as  so  very  fev/  in  all  the  history  of  the 
churches  show,  in  after  life,  that  they  were  then 
regenerated,  the  claim  cannot  be  entitled  to  accept- 
ance, and  the  membership  based  upon  it  cannot  be 
logically  admitted.  The  only  legitimate  place,  then, 
for  them,  is  outside  of  it.  This  was  their  divine-idea 
position  in  the  Abrahamic,  as  we  have  seen.  It 
must  be  the  same  in  a  Christian.  The  somewhat 
prevalent  conception  of  the  former  as  having  a 
legitimate  non-believing,  as  well  as  believing,  mem- 
bership, is  a  mistaken  one ;  and  has  led  to  very  erro- 
neous views,  respecting  the  church  position  of  bap- 
tized children.  From  this  unfounded  conception, 
the  inference  has  been  logically  drawn  that  they  are 
rightly  taken  into  the  church  in  their  baptism.  But 
the  same  reasoning  gives  them  a  membership  all 
through  life,  in  the  full  enjoyment  of  all  its  rights 
and  privileges,  as  was  the  case,  with  rare  exceptions, 
by  perversion  of  her  divine  idea,  in  the  Abrahamic 
church.  The  only  way  to  run  clear  of  such  an 
absurd  conclusion,  is  to  recognize  the  evident  fact 
that  they  were  not  rightly  received  into,  nor  rightly 
permitted  thus  to  remain  in,  that  church. 

The  claim  for  their  church  membership  with  their 
parents   is   made    by  some,  on  the   theory  that  the 


198  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

family  is  the  ultimate  cliurcli  unit.  It  is  asserted 
that,  for  that  reason,  the  family  cannot  be  divided  in 
its  church  relations,  and  so  the  children  must  be 
members  with  them.  But  that  reasoning  proves  too 
much  ;  leads  to  an  absurdity.  It  follows  either  that 
unbelieving  parents  must  be  members  with  their  be- 
lieving children,  or  that  the  latter  must  remain  non- 
members  with  the  former.  It  also  follows  that,  in 
case  the  husband  is  a  believer,  his  unbelieving  wife 
must  be  a  member  with  him,  or  both  must  remain 
non-members,  because  of  her  unbelief.  Such  conse- 
quent absurdities  disprove  the  claim  that  the  ulti- 
mate church  unit  is  the  family.  While  the  family, 
including  only  its  believing  members,  constitute  a 
composite  unit,  individual  believers  alone  constitute 
the  primal  units  of  a  church. 

If  legitimate  members,  as  claimed,  why  are  they 
shut  out  from  church  privileges  all  through  life, 
excepting  as  they  become  believers  and  make  a  pro- 
fession of  their  faith?  It  is  said,  in  reply,  that 
minors  in  the  state  do  not  enjoy  all  the  privileges  of 
citizens,  until,  when  arriving  at  the  required  age, 
they,  virtually  or  literally,  take  the  citizen's  oath  of 
allegiance.  But  is  the  change  from  a  minor  citizen 
to  a  voting  one  enough  like  that  of  an  unregenerate 
to  a  regenerate  man  to  make  the  two  cases  parallel  ? 
Manifestly  not.  If  minors,  as  a  class,  were  disfran- 
chised because  none  of  them  were,  in  their  hearts, 
loyal,  and  so  not  real  citizens,  and  given  the  fran- 
chise when  becoming  twenty-one  years  old  because 
they  then  had  become  such,  the  parallelism  would 
hold,  but,  as  the  case  is,  it  cannot. 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  199 

Dr.  Bushnell  says :  "As  colts  are  classed  as  horses 
.  .  .  non-believing  children  are  members  of  the 
church,  though  deprived  of  its  privileges."  But,  we 
ask,  would  colts  be  classed  with  horses  if  great  num- 
bers of  them  did  not  become  such  all  through 
their  lives,  but  grew  into  other  animals?  And, 
if  all  becoming  such  had  to  experience  a  change 
corresponding  in  its  magnitude  to  that  of  regen- 
eration ?  Evidently  not.  Again,  he  says :  '^  It 
(Christianity)  spreads  its  arms  to  say :  '  For  God  so 
loved  the  world,'  etc.,  and  even  declares  that  publi- 
cans and  harlots  shall  flock  in  before  the  captious 
priests  and  princes  of  the  day,  and  yet  it  has  no 
place,  we  are  told,  for  children.  Children  are  out  of 
the  categojy  of  grace. "^  But  did,  or  could,  those 
publicans  and  harlots  flock  in  as  such  ?  They  did  so 
as,  and  only  as,  they  by  their  repentance  and  faith 
qualified  themselves  so  to  do  ;  and  no  one  disputes 
the  right  and  privilege  of  children  to  enter  into  the 
church  in  the  same  way.  When  making  use  of 
analogies  in  an  argument,  great  care  should  be  taken 
to  guard  against  lurking  fallacies. 

Non-believing  baptized  children  do,  indeed,  sus- 
tain a  very  endearing  relation  to  the  church  of  their 
parents,  as  her  children,  her  wards,  her  consecrated 
ones ;  as  those  under  covenant-nurture,  her  hope  for 
enlargement,  and  the  perfection  of  her  membership, 
as  God  shall  fulfil  his  sure  promises  secured  for 
them ;  but  they  do  not  and  cannot  sustain  the  rela- 
tionship of  real  members. 

1  Christian  Nurture,  pp.  167-8. 


200  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

6.  At  what  age  do  unbelieving  children  cease  to 
be  proper  subjects  of  baptism? 

They  are  proper  subjects  of  its  substance  all 
through  life.  So  long  as  they  live  neither  their  par- 
ents nor  the  church  ought  to  cease  to  do  for,  and  by, 
them,  all  that  is  so  impressively  symbolized  by  the 
rite.  But  not  so  of  its  form.  They  do  not  continue 
proper  subjects  of  that  when,  by  common  consent, 
the}^  cease  to  be  children  and  become  old  enough  to 
act,  to  some  extent,  for  themselves.  This  line  of 
limitation,  of  course,  varies  with  the  varying  circum- 
stances of  different  ages  and  countries.  Something 
depends  upon  the  feelings  of  the  child  himself.  To 
use  force,  or  bare  command,  to  accomplish  it  would 
manifestly  be  improper.  Demented  children  are 
proper  subjects  all  through  life. 

In  the  case  of  believing  children  of  all  ages,  whose 
parents  are,  also,  believers,  their  baptisms  are  parental 
and,  at  the  same  time,  their  own  personal  ones.  They 
are  baptized  by  tlieir  parents  and  their  church,  and, 
also,  by  their  own  responsible  act. 

7.  Ought  it  to  be  administered  to  a  grossly  wicked 
child? 

Yes,  provided  his  assent  is  secured.  As  God  has 
graciously  promised  to  hear  the  prayers  of  all  faith- 
ful parents  for,  and  bless  their  nurture  of,  such  a 
child ;  as  he,  because  of  his  base  character,  needs  all 
the  more  to  have  the  promises  of  the  covenant 
secured  to  them  in  his  behalf;  all  the  more  to  receive 
the  nurture  pledged ;  all  the  more  to  be  continually 
reminded,  by  the  rite,  of  the  solemn  obligations  im- 
posed upon  him, — it  must  be   true   that  he   should 


SCRIPTtJEAL   ARGUMENT.  201 

receive  the  rite.  It  is  a  blessed  truth  that  even  the 
shocking  and  loathsome  crimes  of  the  prodigal  son 
did  not  shut  out  from  the  throne  of  grace  his  praying 
father  daily  interceding  for  him. 

8.  Can  unbelieving  parents  rightly  give  the  rite  to 
their  children  ? 

Of  course  not.  No  more  than  receive  it  them- 
selves. As  they  have  not  the  faith  necessary  to  have 
it  given  to  themselves,  they  cannot  have  that  neces- 
sary to  give  to  any  others.  If  themselves  baptized 
in  infancy,  they  yet  did  not  then  receive  it  in  faith, 
nor  have  they  since  made  it  their  own  by  their  faith. 
They  are  not  baptized  persons  on  their  part. 

Infant  Baptism  is  not  a  priestly  function.  Of 
itself  alone  it  confers  no  graces.  It  merely  symbol- 
izes and  solemnizes  the  faith,  consecration,  etc.,  of 
others.  Believing  parents  go  to  their  pastor  and  vir- 
tually say  to  him :  ''  We  have  given  away  this  our 
child  to  God,  have  consecrated  it  to  his  service,  and 
have  secured  covenant  promises  in  its  behalf;  and 
now,  in  order  that  we  may  be  the  more  impressed 
with  the  responsibilities  which  we  have  assumed, 
more  faithful  to  our  sacred  promises  made,  and  have 
greater  faith  in  our  Heavenly  Father  as  a  covenant- 
keeping  God,  we  ask  you  to  solemnize  what  Ave  have 
thus  done  by  prayer  and  the  use  of  the  baptismal 
symbol  and  seal  divinely  appointed  for  that  purpose." 

What,  then,  could  be  more  improper  than  for  those, 
not  having  done  these  requisite  things,  to  bring  their 
child  for  baptism?  And  what  more  out  of  place 
than  for  a  minister  to  baptize  it?  Is  there  no  false- 
hood involyed  in  thus  giving  a  symbol  which  says 


202  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

that  the  parents  have  done  these  requisite  things, 
when  they  have  not,  and  when  it  is  known  that  they 
have  not? 

9.  Can  believing  parents  who  have  not  made  a 
public  profession  of  their  own  faith,  by  uniting  with 
a  church,  rightly  give  it  to  their  children  ? 

It  is  a  fully  recognized  law  of  obligation  that  self- 
consecration  must  precede  the  consecration  of  others. 
The  reasons  for  the  consecration  of  themselves  (the 
parents)  are  far  more  imperative  than  those  for  that 
of  their  children.  The  reasons  for  their  doing  this 
publicly  and  in  the  usual  way  are,  also,  far  more 
imperative  than  those  for  that  of  their  children,  pub- 
licly and  in  the  usual  way.  It  is  also  a  fully  recog- 
nized law  that  certain  duties  must  be  performed 
before  certain  other  related  ones  can  acceptably  be. 
If  a  man  brings  his  gift  to  the  altar  and  there  re- 
members that  his  brother  hath  aught  against  him,  he 
must  leave  there  his  gift,  unoffered,  go  his  way,  first 
be  reconciled  to  his  brother,  and  then,  not  before, 
come  and  offer  his  gift.  So  when  parents,  not 
church  members,  propose  publicly  to  consecrate  their 
children  in  baptism,  they  must  first,  in  like  manner, 
consecrate  themselves.  So  long  as  that  prior  duty 
is  left  undone,  they  have  no  right  to  attempt  to  do 
the  one  second  in  order,  dependent  upon  the  first  as 
an  essential  qualification  for  its  performance.  The 
refusal  to  do  any  one  known  duty  utterly  disquali- 
fies one  to  do  all  others.  It  ought  to  be  solemnly 
impressed  upon  every  man  that  he  has  no  right  to, 
and  cannot  acceptably,  go  to  the  sacramental  table, 
nor  to   the   sanctuary,  nor  to   his  own  table  at  his 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  203 

home,  nor  to  any  other  place,  so  long  as  he  is  con- 
scious of  refusing  or,  knowingly,  neglecting  one 
single  previous  duty  resting  upon  him. 

If  parents  do  not  see  the  necessity  of  first  making 
a  public  profession  themselves,  they  should  be  so 
instructed,  in  order  to  become  intelligent  enough  to 
be  qualified  to  give  the  rite.  No  qualifications  are 
essential  which  are  not  within  the  reach  of  every 
one,  without  exception.  If  they  see  this  necessity 
and  still  disregard  this  prior  duty,  they  thus  show 
themselves  morally  disqualified  to  give  it  to  their 
children. 

10.  Are  children  who  have  no  believing  parent 
ever  proper  subjects  of  baptism  ? 

They  are  if  they  virtually  have  one,  as  is  the  case 
more  or  less  frequently  with  waifs,  orphans,  and 
others,  who  are  taken  by  believers  into  their  families 
and  are  subjected  to  their  training  as  virtually  their 
own  children.  Infant  Baptism  is,  above  all,  a  symbol 
of  the  faith,  consecration,  and  the  faithful  Christian 
nurture  of  the  parents,  and  it  is  difficult  to  see  how 
children  having  no  sure  prospect  of  such  parental 
training  can  be  its  proper  subjects.  It  is  a  funda- 
mental principle  of  Protestantism  that  sacred  syrn- 
bols  can  be  rightly  used  only  as  they  represent  their 
real  substance,  and  that  their  use  when  not  so  doing 
is  solemn  mockery.  A  minister  may  baptize  a  child 
independent  of  its  unbelieving  parents,  provided  he 
can  rightly,  and  will,  take  it  under  his  own  care  and 
nurture,  or  secure  it  a  home  in  another  believing 
family ;  not  otherwise.  A  church,  through  its  min- 
ister, may  baptize   a    child  of  unbelieving   parents, 


204  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

provided  they  can  rightly,  and  will,  put  it  under 
the  home  training  of  believing  guardians,  not  other- 
wise. 

The  great  essential  to  the  rite  —  its  indispensable 
substance  —  is  that  the  child  have  believing  parents, 
either  natural  or  virtual  ones,  who  confess  them- 
selves responsible  for,  and  pledged  to,  its  faithful 
religious  training.  Only  as  a  minister  has  credible 
evidence  that  this  is  the  case,  can  he  rightfull}^  bap- 
tize a  child.  Only  upon  such  conditions  can  the 
baptism  be  beneficial  to  the  child.  To  baj^tize  a 
child,  knowing  that  it  will  have  no  parental,  faithful 
nurture,  is  cruel  and  hurtful,  like  as  it  is  to  give  one 
a  natural  birth  and  then  leave  it  without  parental 
care.  The  supposition  that  a  child,  who  will  receive 
no  such  nurture,  is  benefited  by  the  rite,  attributes 
to  it  a  talismanic  power ;  makes  it  an  opus  operatum, 
—  a  claim  which,  while  strenuously  insisted  upon 
by  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  is  yet  just  as  strenu- 
ously rejected  by  all  true  Protestants. 

The  fact  that  the  infant  is  a  child  of  God  does  not 
of  itself,  as  some  claim,  make  it  a  ]Di"oper  subject  of 
baptism.  Every  man,  even  the  most  wicked,  is,  in 
the  same  sense,  a  child  of  God — such  by  creation, 
preservation,  and  proffered  redemption ;  such,  also, 
as  the  recipient  of  numberless  mercies  from  his  lov- 
ing hand,  and  as  bearing  his  own  real,  though  sadly 
defaced,  image.  If  simply  being  a  child  of  God  jus- 
tifies its  baptism,  then  it  follows  that  all  men,  regard- 
less of  their  character,  are  likewise  entitled  to  it. 

11.  Is  the  baptism  of  sick  children,  apparently 
near  unto  death,  to  be  encouraged? 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  205 

We  think  not.  Its  parents,  if  qualified  to  baptize 
such  a  child,  have  done  so  already,  for  substance, 
and  we  think  it  would  be  better  to  let  that  suffice. 
In  case  it  was  the  holy  purpose  of  the  parents  to 
baptize  it  at  an  early  day,  but,  owing  to  their  sick- 
ness, or  other  disabling  circumstances,  they  delayed 
it  until  its  dying-bed  sickness,  it  would  not  be  very 
objectionable.  But  if  they  had  no  fixed  purpose  to 
do  so  when  the  child  was  well,  and  probably  would 
not,  even  in  its  sickness,  nor  afterwards,  if  they 
should  see  good  evidence  of  its  recovery  before  they 
had  sent  for  a  minister  to  baptize  it,  the  rite  mani- 
festly should  not  be  administered.  There  is  usually 
so  much  of  superstition — looking  upon  the  rite  as 
possessing  some  magic  potency — in  such  baptisms, 
that  we  cannot  think  it  advisable  to  encourage  them. 

12.  Would  it  be  right  and  wise  for  the  churches 
to  adopt  another  form,  aptly  picturing  the  substance 
of  Infant  Baptism,  as  a  substitute  for  its  present  one  ; 
provided  that  by  such  a  change,  the  removal  of  the 
now-existing  lamentable  separation  of  Baptists  from 
Pedo-baptists  could  be  effected,  and  such  a  much- 
desired  union  secured? 

While  such  a  substitution  would  not  be  inherently 
wrong,  as  that  of  baptism  for  circumcision  was  not, 
it  yet  would  not  be  practicable  and  so  not  wise.  It 
would  not  accomplish  the  worthy  results  sought ;  it 
would  not  remove  the  cause  of  the  separation,  and  so 
could  not  make  the  wished-for  union  more  possible. 
To  Pedo-baptists  the  new  form  would  be  baptism  all 
the  same, — changed,  not  in  substance,  but  only  in 
form.     They  would  be  compelled,  as  in  duty  bound, 


206  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

to  insist  upon  this  identity,  and,  b}^  so  doing,  make 
the  proposed  union  repugnant  to,  and  wholly  unal- 
lowable by.  Baptists.^ 

The  Rite  as  affected  hy  the  Claims  of  Higher  Criti- 
cism.— As  this  Scriptural  Argument  has  now  reached 
its  completion,  the  question  naturally  arises :  How  is 
the  rite  affected  by  the  claims  of  higher  criticism  ? 
We  reply:  As  already  shown  (pp.  121,  122),  the 
claimed  mythical  character  of  Adam  and  Noah  does 
not  affect  it  at  all.  But  we  must  admit  that  the 
claimed  mythical  character  of  Abraham  does  largely 
affect  it.  The  supposition  that  Abraham,  the  cov- 
enant made  with  him,  the  seal  given  him,  etc.,  are 
all  mythical,  takes  away  from  it  its  great  and  essen- 
tial proof-texts.  It  thus  makes  it  destitute  of  tex- 
tual, bible  authority,  and  so  disqualifies  it  to  be  a 
church  ordinance ;  as  positive  Bible  proof-texts  are 
essential  to  all  such.  But  while  so  doing,  it  would 
not  affect  its  substance  in  the  least.  Its  Argument 
from  Reason  would  remain  unrefuted  and  irrefutable, 
and  its  foundation-principles,  found  j)ervading  the 
entire  Bible  and  cropping  out  in  varying  forms,  more 
or  less  frequently  in  all  its  parts,  would  remain 
unshaken  and  abiding,  like  as  the  deep  underground 
granite  strata  remain  untouched  and  undisturbed  by 
the  furious  storms  and  terrific  cyclones  sweeping- 
over  and  rending  the  exposed  surface  of  the  earth 
above  them. 

iThe  dedication  of  a  child  necessarily  involves  the  whole  substance 
of  Infant  Baptism. 


CHAPTER   XIII 

HISTORICAL    ARCUMENT.i 

Part  First. 

WRITINGS  OF  CERTAIN  FATHERS  IN  THE  FIRST 
FIVE  CENTURIES. 

This  historical  argument  has  for  its  field  of  inves- 
tigation the  history  of  the  churches  in  that  period 
which  extends  from  the  close  of  the  Apostolic  age 
to  the  present  time.  Its  object  is  to  see  how  continu- 
ously and  generally  Infant  Baptism  has  been  re- 
garded as  of  scriptural  authority  in  that  period. 

This  Argument  not  EssentiaL — Infant  Baptism 
stands  or  falls  with  its  scriptural  argument,  and  is 
wholly  independent  of  its  historical.  If  scriptural, 
no  facts  of  uninspired  history  can  disprove  it  as 
divinely  authoritative ;  if  not  scriptural,  none  can 
render  it  such  in  the  least  degree.  It  must  find 
certain  proof  of  that  authority  in  the  Word  of  God 
alone  exclusive  of  that  from  all  other  sources.  The 
facts  of  history  can  only  show  that  the  churches 
have,  more  or  less  generally,  always  confessed  its 
scriptural  authority  by  practising  it.  The  only 
question,  then,  before  us  is  this,  Can  the  recorded 
facts  of  history  be  interpreted  in  harmony  with  the 
now-proved  or  assumed  scriptural  authority  of   the 

iTo  avoid  too  great  length  we  shall  be  obliged  greatly  to  abridge  its 
first  part,  as  prepared  in  original  manuscript. 


208  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

rite  ?  The  answer  to  this  question  contains  all  that  is 
necessarily  involved  in  this  entire  argument.  If  we 
had  any  want  of  confidence  in  our  scriptural  argu- 
ment just  now  completed,  as  in  itself  alone  conclu- 
sive, we  should  not  waste  any  more  time  in  consider- 
ing the  testimony  of  history.  We  should  rather 
throw  away  all  we  have  written,  and  confess  our 
whole  undertaking  a  failure.  It  is  because  we 
full}^  believe  that  it  has  been  shown  to  be  certainly 
scriptural,  that  we  now  proceed  to  examine  the 
writings  of  the  fathers  upon  the  subject.  We  shall, 
therefore,  conduct  the  investigation  upon  the  assump- 
tion that  the  rite  is  firmly  and  surely  planted  on  that 
immovable  scriptural  rock  as  claimed,  and  we  shall 
make  use  of  the  jjresumption  which  that  assumption 
will  give  in  favor  of  Pedo-baptist  interpretations. 
We,  therefore,  with  good  reason,  ask  objectors  to 
grant  this  our  assumption  for  the  sake  of  argument. 
Those  refusing,  we  do  not  invite  to  listen  to  us.  As 
we  do  not  go  to  history  for  any  essential  proof,  we 
have  the  right  thus  to  limit  the  scope  of  our 
investigation. 

Apostolic  Fathers. — Latter  part  of  First  Cen- 
tury. Baptists  tell  us,  "  Not  one  of  these — Barna- 
bas, Clemens,  Romanus,  Hernias,  Ignatius,  or  Poly- 
carp — eitlier  expressly  alludes  to  it  or  says  anything 
which  may  be  referred  to  Infant  Baptism ;  but,  on 
the  other  hand,  their  writings  contain  many  passages 
where  the  baptism  of  believers  is  mentioned."  We 
accept  this  statement  without  question,  and  remark 
that  only  very  few  and  fragmentary  are  the  extant 
writings  of  theirs,  and  it  may  be  that  full  records  of 


HISTORICAL   ARGUMENT.  209 

church  proceedings  in  their  time  would  contain 
many  such  baptisms.  The  scriptural  authority  of 
the  rite,  now  proved  and  here  assumed,  makes  it  far 
easier  to  believe  this  than  that  such  a  rite  was  not 
then  practised.  That  presumption  practically  decides 
the  question. 

Justin  Martyr. — (Middle  of  Second  Century.) 
In  his  second  apology  to  emperor  Anton i us  Pius,  he 
describes  the  baptism  of  believers,  duly  examined, 
thus  :  "  Afterward  they  are  conducted  to  a  place 
where  there  is  water,  and  after  the  same  manner  of 
regeneration  whereby  we  ourselves  were  regenerated, 
they  are  regenerated.  For  they  then  take  a  bath  in 
the  name  of  the  Lord  God  and  Father  of  us  all,  and 
of  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit."^ 
No  certain  mention  of  Infant  Baptisms  is  found  in 
any  of  his  extant  writings,  and  only  in  this  one,  those 
of  believers.  This  his  mere  non-mention  is  very  far 
from  making  it  certain  or  extremely  probable  that 
Infant  Baptisms  were  not  known  to  him  as  apostolic. 
No  writer  professes  to  mention  every  related  sub- 
ject. It  is  more  or  less  common  for  one  to  confine 
himself  to  some  single  point.  It  cannot  be  that  an 
apostolic  rite  had  died  out  of  practice  as  early  as  his 
time.  Its  scriptural  authority  makes  it  morally  cer- 
tain that  there  were  such,  right  in  the  face  of  his 
non-mention.  Notice  that  he  uses  regeneration  for 
baptism.  That  fact  will  shed  light  upon  its  use  by 
Ireneeus,  as  we  shall  see. 

Teachings  of  the  Apostles. — (Middle  of  Sec- 
ond Century.)     In  them  the  baptism  of  believers  is 

iWiberg  on  Baptism,  p,  212. 
15 


210  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

described,  but  no  mention  of  that  of  children  is  made. 
Our  scriptural  assumption  makes  it  morally  certain 
that  there  were  such  notwithstanding. 

This  claim  is  greatly  confirmed  by  the  writings 
of  Origen  of  the  first  half  of  the  third  century.  He 
expressly  says,  as  we  shall  soon  see,  that  Infant 
Baptism  was  in  the  church  at  his  time,  and  had  been 
received  from  the  apostles.  This  space  of  time  in 
which  the  rite  is  not  mentioned,  and  which  is 
bridged  over  by  the  scriptural  authority  of  the  rite, 
covers  only  about  a  century.  Can  so  short  a  bridge 
by  such  a  builder  be  condemned  as  untrustworthy  ? 
We  think  not. 

Because  circumcision  was  a  divinely-instituted 
and  enjoined  rite  we  know  that  it  was  generally 
practised  by  the  Jews  from  Abraham  to  Christ,  not- 
withstanding the  very  few  records  of  them  in  all 
those  many  centuries.  Periods  of  their  non-mention 
cover  ages  not  mentioned  by  many  of  the  scripture 
writers  of  that  dispensation  covering  many  cen- 
turies. 

Irex^eus. — (Last  part  of  Second  Centur}^)  "For  he 
came  to  save  all  persons  by  himself — all,  I  mean,  who 
by  him  are  regenerated  unto  God,  infants,  little  ones, 
and  children,  and  elder  persons."^  He  here  speaks  of 
infants  as  distinguished  from  little  ones,  children, 
etc.,  as  regenerated  by  Christ  unto  God.  (1).  Does 
he  refer  to  their  actual  spiritual  new  birth  ?  Does 
his  statement  show  the  erroneous  dogma  of  re- 
generation of  believers'  children,  as  held  in  his 
time  ?     If  so,  it  is  most  naturally  accounted  for  by 

ilren.  adv.  Hasr.,  lib.  2,  c.  22,  §  4.    Ed.  Bened,  171. 


HISTORICAL   ARGUMENT.  211 

the  supposition  that  Infant  Baptism  had  been  long 
known,  and  that  the  dogma  had  grown  from  it  by 
perversion.  (2).  Is. his  statement  to  be  interpreted 
figuratively  ?  Even  then  he  must  refer  to  some  kind 
of  a  literal  regeneration  of  infants  known  to  his 
readers.  A  figure  is  a  literal  fact  used  to  mirror  a 
higher  truth.  "  God  is  a  sun "  points  to  a  literal 
sun,  picturing  God  by  resemblances.  "  Burial  in 
baptism  "  points  to  a  literal  baptism  by  immersion, 
known  in  Paul's  time.  So  infant  regeneration,  as  a 
figure  of  speech,  must  point  to  a  well-known  literal 
one  used  as  a  mirror.  If  this  was  not  their  actual 
new  birth,  what  could  it  be  but  their  baptism  ?  Just 
suppose  the  baptism  of  infants  then  known  and  prac- 
tised and  IreuEeus  using  regeneration  as  synonymous 
with  baptism,  as  Justin  Martyr  did,  and  as  was 
doubtless  then  common,  and  his  statement  is  seen  to 
be  true  and  appropriate. 

Whether  simply  literal  or  used  figuratively,  then, 
in  both  cases  it  would  seem  to  point  unmistakably  to 
the  rite  as  known  and  practised  in  the  churches. 
Our  scriptural  assumption  sanctions  this  conclusion, 
and  the  testimony  of  Origen  confirms  the  same,  as 
we  shall  see. 

TuRTULLiAN  (wrote  near  the  close  of  the  second- 
century).  The  following  is  found  in  his  writings : 
"  Baptism  is  not  to  be  given  rashly;  but,  according 
to  the  condition  and  the  disposition  and  the  age  of 
ever}^  person,  the  delay  of  baptism  is  more  useful ; 
but  especially  of  little  children.  For  why  is  it  nec- 
essary, if  not  so  necessary"  (except  in  cases  of  neces- 
sity), "that   the    sponsors    should    be   brought   into 


212  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

peril,  since  they  may  fail  to  keep  their  promises 
through  death  and  may  be  deceived  through  the  de- 
velopment of  a  sinful  disposition.  The  Lord  indeed 
says,  Do  not  forbid  them  to  come  unto  me.  There- 
fore let  them  come  when  they  are  growing  up ;  let 
them  come  when  they  are  studying ;  when  they  know 
whither  they  are  to  come.  Let  them  be  made  Chris- 
tians when  they  can  know  Christ.  Why  should  their 
innocent  age  make  haste  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins  ? 
For  no  less  cause  must  the  unmarried  be  deferred,  in 
whom"  (the  ground  of)  "temptation  is  prepared,  alike 
in  such  as  never  were  married,  by  their  immaturity, 
and  in  the  widowed  by  means  of  their  freedom"  (from 
the  marriage  yoke)  "until  they  either  marry  or  else 
are  more  fully  strengthened  for  maintaining  conti- 
nence. If  any  understand  the  weighty  import  of 
baptism,  they  will  fear  its  reception  more  than  its  de- 
lay."i 

(1).  Baptists  infer  from  these  his  statements,  that, 
in  Turtullian's  time,  Infant  Baptism  was  not  gener- 
ally practised ;  was  not  regarded  as  apostolic ;  had 
just  begun  to  be  practised  in  rare  cases,  and  was  op- 
posed by  him  as  an  innovation.  (2).  Pedo-baptists  : 
That  it  was  generally  practised  as  apostolic ;  that  he, 
through  mistaken  notions  of  the  nature  and  respon- 
sibilities of  the  rite,  and,  under  the  pressure  of  other 
erroneous  views,  advised  some  modifications  of  it. 
His  language  will  justify  either  of  these  opposite  in- 
ferences. If  it  was  not  regarded  by  him  as  apostolic, 
he  could  properly  advise  delay  as  he  did.  But  it 
seems  surpassing  strange  that  he  does  not  give  that 

1  Turtullian,  Le  Baptismo,  c.  18. 


HISTORICAL   ARGUMENT.  213 


as  a  reason.  If  it  was  not  apostolic,  then,  of  course, 
little  children  should  not  be  baptized.  Why  then 
not  mention  that  greatest  and  absolutely  decisive 
reason,  if  he  knew  it  to  be  true?  This,  his  non- 
mention,  then,  greatly  disproves  the  Baptists'  infer- 
ences. 

If  he  regarded  it  as  apostolic  and  kncAV  it  to  be 
generally  practised,  he  might  still  advise  such  modi- 
fications as  he  does.  But  we  are  told  that  he  cher- 
ished a  sacred  regard  for  apostolic  tmdition.  True, 
but,  also,  a  great  propensity  for  innovation.  He 
went  squarely  against  that  tradition  in  advising  the 
delay  of  baptism  in  case  of  the  unmarried  and  wid- 
owed. He  is  rej)resented  by  historians  as  a  man  who 
"lacked  discretion  and  judgment;  "^  and  as  "nar- 
row, bigoted,  and  uncharitable."  ^  He  evidently  was 
an  ill-balanced  and  eccentric  man,  and,  like  many 
others  of  the  same  sort,  Avas  the  greatest  stickler  for, 
-and  a  great  innovator  of,  the  same  traditionary  ordi- 
nance. 

Origen  (wrote  in  the  first  half  of  the  second  cen- 
tury). There  are  in  his  extant  writings,  these  three, 
and  only  these,  passages,  in  as  many  different  books, 
which  speak  of  the  baptism  of  children : 

''  To  these  considerations  it  can  be  added,  that  it  may 
be  inquired  why,  since  the  baptism  of  the  church  is  given 
for  the  remission  of  sins,  baptism  is  given,  according  to 
the  observance  of  the  church,  even  to  chiklren;  for  the 
grace  of  baptism  woukl  seem  superfluous  if  there  were 
nothing  in  children  requiring  remission  and  indulgence."^ 

1  Mosheim's  Eccl.  Hist.,  I,   122-3. 

2  The  People's  Cyclopedia. 

3  Homily  VIII  on  Leviticus,  c.  12:  1-8,  Ruflnus's  Latin  version. 


214  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

"Children  are  baj)tized  for  the  remission  of  sins.  Of 
what  sins  ?  or  when  have  they  sinned?  or  how  can  any 
reason  of  the  laver  in  their  case  hold  good,  unless  accord- 
ing to  that  sense  which  we  have  just  mentioned?  None  is 
free  from  pollution,  though  his  life  be  but  the  length  of 
one  day  upon  earth,  "^ 

''For  this  also  the  church  has  received  a  tradition 
from  the  apostles  to  give  baptism  even  to  children  ;  for 
they  to  whom  the  secrets  of  the  divine  mysteries  were 
committed,  knew  that  in  all  persons  there  is  the  native 
pollution  of  sin,  which  must  be  done  away  by  water  and 
the  Spirit;  on  account  of  which  pollution,  even  the  body 
itself  is  called  the  body  of  sin."  ^ 

In  these  passages  Origen  refers  to  children  too 
young  to  have  voluntary  sin,  too  young  to  believe, 
and  so  too  young  to  be  baptized  upon  their  own 
faith.  The  necessities  of  his  argument  require  it. 
He  is  seeking  to  prove  the  sinful  pollution  of  men 
of  all  ages,  not  excepting  those  but  a  day  old,  and 
he  makes  use  of  the  apostolic  baptism  of  children  as 
conclusive  proof  in  the  case.  His  reasoning  is  as 
follows :  Baptism  is  for  the  remission  of  sins ;  all 
its  subjects,  then,  are  sinful;  children,  then,  being 
its  subjects,  must  be  sinful,  but  they  cannot  have 
voluntary  sin,  and  so  must  have  involuntary;  hence 
they  must  have,  from  birth,  sinful  natures ;  hence 
human  beings,  of  all  ages,  must  have  the  same.  To 
suppose  him  alluding  to  children  guilty  of  voluntary 
sin,  nullifies  his  reasoning.  The  voluntary  sin,  of 
itself,  would  justify  their  baptism,  and  there  would 
be  no  need  of  any  other  for  its  justification.     A  lec- 

1  Homily  XIV  on  Luke,  c.  2:  21-24,  Jerome's  Latin  version. 
-  Commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the   Romans,  Book  V,  9,  Rufinus's 
Latin  version. 


HISTORICAL   ARGUMENT.  215 

turer  speaking  of  certain  animals  unable  to  walk, 
yet  able  to  move  round  with  facility,  and  mentioning 
children  as  instances,  could  not  be  understood  as 
referring  to  those  old  enough  to  walk,  but  solely 
those  only  able  to  creep. 

These  positive  passages  —  positively  asserting  In- 
fant Baptisms  —  show  that  there  can  be,  in  all  his 
writings,  no  hostile  ones,  none  in  conflict  with  the 
rite.  No  intelligent,  honest  writer  will  contradict 
himself  —  affirm  one  thing  in  one  place  and  its  oppo- 
site in  another.  But  it  is  claimed  by  objectors  that 
there  are  other  passages  which  indicate  that  Origen 
could  not  have  believed  in  the  baptism  of  such  chil- 
dren. We  have  devoted  a  good  deal  of  time  to  their 
consideration,  and  are  convinced  that  they  are  not 
necessarily  hostile,  but  ma}^  be  interpreted  as  in  har- 
mony with  the  rite.  Take,  for  instance,  this  one  in 
his  Commentary  on  Romans  (book  5,  chapter  8)  : 
"But  if  he  is  not  buried  with  Christ,  neither  is  he 
legitimately  baptized."  This  is  pointed  to,  and 
greatly  emphasized,  as  certainly  and  fatally  hostile. 
But  it  may  simply  mean  that  a  man  destitute  of 
faith,  who,  through  mistake  or  otherwise,  has  re- 
ceived the  form,  is  not  legitimately  or  validly  bap- 
tized on  Jiis  part.  That  is  true,  but  the  fact  does 
not  conflict  with  the  claims  of  the  rite  in  the  least, 
as  we  have  abundantly  shown  in  our  Argument 
from  Reason. 

It  is  claimed  by  objectors  that  these  positive  pas- 
sages are  not  those  of  Origen,  but  interpolations 
by  the  translators,  Jerome  and  Rufinus.  But  that 
makes  it  all   the   more   impossible    to    suppose    the 


216  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

alleged  hostile  passages  really  liostile.  If  interpola- 
tions, they  must  have  been  inserted  by  the  transla- 
tors ;  and  if  the  alleged  hostile  ones  were  such,  they 
must  have  been  known  to  them  as  such.  Why,  then, 
did  they  not  change  or  expurgate  them  ?  If  dis- 
honest enough  to  insert  the  positive  ones  as  Origen's, 
when  they  were  not,  would  they  have  scrupled,  or 
been  foolish  enough,  to  let  remain  conflicting  ones, 
certain  to  lead  to  the  detection  of  their  lying  fraud  ? 
We  can  imagine  a  counterfeiter  wicked  enough  to 
change  the  figure  five  on  a  bank  bill  to  fifty,  and 
then  try  to  pass  it  for  ten  times  its  value ;  but  can 
we  suppose  him  idiotic  enough  to  leave,  on  the  re- 
verse side,  the  large  letters  five  unchanged? 

The  charge  of  interpolations  is  a  very  serious  one, 
and  cannot  be  allowed  to  be  made  ao^ainst  those  dis- 
tinguished  and  pious  Fathers  of  the  Church  without 
the  most  certain  proof,  of  which  there  is  none  worthy 
of  the  name.  From  what  Ave  have  now  learned,  we 
confidently  afiirm  that  there  are  few  historic  facts 
more  undeniable  than  that  Origen  affirms  tlie  bap- 
tism of  infant  children  as  an  ordinance  received  from 
the  apostles.  As  Origen  makes  use  of  the  rite  as 
a  basis  of  argumeiit,  it  must  have  been  generally 
known  and  practised  in  his  time.  He  would  not  be 
so  illogical  nor  dishonest  as  to  make  such  a  use  of  a 
disjnited  fact,  a  recent  innovation,  a  rite  not  gener- 
ally accepted  as  apostolic. 

This  so  positive  and  unmistakable  testimony  of  a 
Father  so  distinguished  and  honored,  and  so  Avell 
qualified  to  give  it,  is  most  weighty  and  decisive  in 
the  case.     His  great  learning,  confessed  piety,  born 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT.  217 

in  185,  less  than  a  century  after  the  death  of  the 
Apostle  John ;  the  son  of  a  martyr-father ;  grandson 
of  an  eminent  Christian  whose  birth  ran  back  nearly 
to  the  close  of  the  first  century,  —  all  these  facts 
fully  qualified  him  to  testify  to  the  apostolic  origin 
of  the  rite.  This,  his  testimony,  then,  makes  it 
morally  certain  that  Infant  Baptism,  as  apostolic, 
came  down,  in  a  general  and  uninterrupted  practice, 
from  the  apostolic  to  liis  own  age. 

This,  his  testimony,  then,  confirms  the  Pedo-bap- 
tist  interpretation  of  the  Fathers  preceding  him, 
whose  writings  we  have  so  hastily  examined.  Jt 
also  will  greatly  confirm  the  interpretation  of  the 
writings  of  his  succeeding  Fathers,  who,  as  we  shall 
see,  pronounce  the  rite  Scriptural,  and  practised  as 
such,  in  their  times.  So  generally  then  known  as 
apostolic,  it  could  not  have  become  not  known,  as 
such,  before  the  time  of  Augustine. 

Cyprian  (Fourth  Century) :  He  asked  advice  of 
a  council  in  Carthage,  as  to  the  proper  time  for  the 
baptism  of  infant  children ;  whether  at  birth  or  on 
the  eighth  day  as  in  circumcision?  The  council 
gave  judgment  for  the  birth-time,  and  their  reasons.^ 

Gregory  Nazianzen  (Fourth  Century)  :  "  Have 
you  an  infant?  "  he  asks.  "  Let  not  evil  take  advan- 
tage of  his  age.  Let  it  be  sanctified  in  infancy.  Let 
it  be  consecrated  by  the  Spirit  from  birth.  You,  as 
a  faint-hearted  mother  of  little  faith,  are  afraid  to 
bestow  the  seal  because  of  its  weakness.  But  Han- 
nah, even  before  Samuel  was  born,  promised  him  to 
God,   and,   as    soon    as    born,   consecrated   him    and 

1  Sea  Wiberg  on  Baptism,  pp.  247,  248. 


218  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

clothed  him  in  a  holy  garment,  not  fearing  human 
weakness,  but  trusting  in  God."   No  comment  needed. 

This  other  passage :  ''But,  say  some,  what  is  your 
opinion  of  infants  who  are  not  capable  of  judging 
either  of  the  grace  of  baptism,  or  of  the  damage  sus- 
tained by  the  want  of  it?  Shall  we  baptize  them 
too  ?  By  all  means  if  there  be  any  apparent  danger. 
For  it  would  be  better  that  they  be  sanctified  with- 
out their  knowledge  than  that  they  should  die  with- 
out being  sealed  and  initiated." 

As  for  others,  I  give  my  opinion,  that  when  they 
are  three  years  old  or  thereabout  (for  then  they  are 
old  enough  to  hear  and  answer  some  of  the  mystic 
words ;  and,  although  the}^  may  not  fully  under- 
stand, they  can  receive  impressions),  they  may  be 
sanctified  soul  and  body  by  the  great  mystery  of 
initiation.! 

This  last  passage  shows  that  he,  like  Turtullian, 
was  led  by  erroneous  views  of  the  rite  to  advise 
some  modifications — a  delay,  in  most  cases,  till  about 
the  age  of  three  years.  The  first  suggests  the  prev- 
alence of  the  rite  in  his  time  ;  this  last  expresses  his 
own  independent  opinion.  But  the  delayed  ones 
were  infant  baptisms  all  the  same.  His  sanction  of 
the  baptism  of  little  children  apparently  near  unto 
death  was  a  like  sanction  of  the  rite  as  righteous ; 
and  is  his  testimony  to  it  as  scriptural,  unless  he 
regarded  scriptural  authority  as  not  essential  to  bap- 
tism. His  proposed  modification  did  not  essentially 
change  the  rite.  If  all  the  churches  should  now 
delay  their  baptisms   until  the  age   of  seven,  when 

1  Gregory  Naz.,  Or.  XL. 


HISTORICAL   ARGUMENT.  219 

they  could  be  made  to  understand  something  about 
the  nature  and  obligations  of  the  rite,  they  would 
still  be  infant  baptisms.  We  once  baptized  a  child 
of  about  that  age.  We  first  took  pains  to  instruct 
him  as  much  as  we  could  respecting  it  and  gained 
his  cheerful  acquiescence.  We  baptized  him,  not  as  a 
believer,  but  as  a  non-believing  child  of  the  covenant. 
It  is  an  error  to  supjoose  that  baptism  alwa}- s  requires 
on  the  part  of  the  subject  the  knowledge  of,  and 
assent  to,  what  is  administered.  As  well  say  the 
same  of  consecrating  an  infant  to  God  as  did  Hannah. 
It  is  not  essential  to  the  dedication  of  a  house  of 
worship  that  the  latter  participate  intelligently.  An 
infant,  not  a  moral  agent,  takes  no  part  in  its  bap- 
tism, perfectl}^  passive.  It  was  this  error  which  led 
astray  Gregory,  as  it  did  Turtullian  before,  and  a 
great  many  others  since  his  day,  as  we  shall  see. 

Basil  the  Great  (Fourth  Century):  "Do  you 
(his  catechumens)  demur  and  loiter  and  put  off? 
When  you  have  been  from  a  child  cate*chised  in  the 
word,  are  you  not  yet  come  to  the  knowledge  of  it? 
A  seeker  all  your  life  long ;  a  considerer  till  you  are 
old !  When  will  you  be  made  a  Christian  ?  When 
shall  we  see  you  become  one  of  us  ?  Last  year  you 
were  for  staying  until  this,  and  now  you  have  a  mind 
to  stay  till  next.  Take  heed  that,  by  promising 
yourselves  a  long  life,  you  do  not  miss  3^our  hope. 
You  do  not  know  what  change  to-morrow  may 
bring."  ^  He  here  makes  no  mention  of  their  bap- 
tism. He  simply  reproves  them  for  not  becoming 
Christians  without  longer  delay.     His  reproofs  are 

1  Wall's  Hist,  of  Inf.  Bap.,  part  I,  c.  12,  ss.  3,  4. 


220  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

not  inconsistent  with  the  claim  that  some  of  them 
had  been  baptized  in  infancy  and  shoukl  profesS 
their  faith  by  accepting  their  parental  baptism  as 
their  own.  Similar  words  could  be,  and  often  are, 
now  used  addressed  to  those  baptized  in  infancy. 

Chrysostom  (Fourth  Century) :  "  We  baptize 
infants  for  this  reason,  that,  though  not  polluted  by 
any  sin,  they  may  thus  obtain  sanctity,  righteous- 
ness, adoption,  the  inheritance  of  the  fellowship  of 
Christ. 1  Our  circumcision  (I  speak  of  that  of  bap- 
tism) has  pleasure  without  sufferiug  and  healing,  is 
the  minister  of  a  thousand  benefits,  and  fills  us  with 
the  blessings  of  the  Spirit.  Nor  has  it  aLny  deter- 
minative time,  as  the  other;  but  one  in  immature 
age  and  in  middle  life  and  in  old  age  may  receive 
this  circumcision  that  is  without  hands."  ^ 

Evidently  he  regards  baptism  as  the  successor  of, 
and  identical  with,  circumcision.  The  clause  "with- 
out hands  "  seems  to  show  that  he  has  most  in  mind 
the  spirituaf  substance  of  baptism,  the  washing  of 
regeneration ;  and  that  he  regards  both  circumcision 
and  baptism  as  divinely-appointed  symbols  of  it — the 
latter  an  improved  one.  The  form  of  the  one  is  no 
more  without  hands  than  that  of  the  other. 

Pelaglus  (Fourth  and  Fifth  Ceuturies)  :  "I  have 
never  heard  of  any,  not  even  the  most  impious  here- 
tic, who  denies  the  baptism  of  infants."  ^  In  a  heated 
controversy  with  Augustine  respecting  original  sin, 
in  which  Augustine  lays  great  stress  upon  Infant 
Baptism  as  conclusive  evidence  of  it,  Pelagius  makes 

1  August,  contra  Jul.  Lib.  1,  21. 

2  Horn.  XL  in  Genesin. 

sApud  August.,  De  Pecc.  Orig.,  ss.  19,  20. 


HISTORICAL   ARGUMENT.  221 

no  objection  gTounded  on  the  plea  that  the  rite  is 
unscriptural,  as  we  shonkl  think  he  certainly  would 
have  done,  had  he  known  it  as  such.  This  makes 
his  testimony  especially  weighty. 

Augustine  (Fourth  and  Fifth  Centuries)  :  "•  If 
any  one  demands  divine  authority  for  this  thing,  we 
can  well  show  what  the  sacrament  of  baptism  avails 
for  infants  from  the  circumcision  a  former  people 
received ;  though  what  the  whole  church  practises, 
and  was  not  instituted  by  councils,  but  was  always 
held,  may  most  justly  be  believed  to  be  handed  down 
by  apostolic  authority."  ^ 

"  The  custom  of  the  mother  church  in  baptizing 
infants  must  by  no  means  be  slighted  or  esteemed 
useless,  or  thought  to  be  anything  else  than  an  apos- 
tolic tradition. "2 

"  This  Infant  Baptism  the  church  has  always  had, 
always  held ;  this  it  received  from  the  creed  of  the 
fathers ;  this  it  guards  perseveringly  to  the  end."^ 

Are  these,  his  statements,  reliable  ?  Can  we  ac- 
cept them  as  certain  evidence  that  the  rite  came 
down  to  his  time,  from  the  apostles,  as  a  generally- 
known  and  practised  rite  ?  It  must  be  admitted 
that  he  knew,  through  his  immediate  ancestry,  as  to 
its  prevalence  in  his  own  time,  and  as  far  back  as 
seventy-five  years  before  his  birth,  279,  within 
about  fift}^  years  of  the  time  when  Origen  wrote ; 
and  so  far  his  statements  are  reliable.  He  certainly 
knew,  upon  the  authority  of  Origen,  that  it  came 
down  from    the   apostles  and  was   generally  known 

iLiberlV,  c.  24. 

2  De  Genesi,  Liber  X,  c.  23. 

3  Sermo  X,  De  Verbis  Apostoli. 


222  INFA^^T   BAPTISM. 

and  practised  as  such  in  Origen's  time.  It  was  safe, 
then,  for  him  to  afifirm  its  general  prevalence  from 
the  apostolic  age  to  liis  own ;  as  there  could  be  no 
break  between  Origen's  time  and  the  seventy-fifth 
year  before  his  own  birth — a  period  of  only  some  fifty 
years.  Deprived  of  Origen's  statements,  his  own 
would  not  be  reliable  back  to  the  apostles  ;  with 
them  they  can  but  be. 

Statements^  in  his  writings  also  speak  of  infant 
communion  as  coming  down  from  tlie  apostles  ;  ^  but, 
as  they  are  not  confirmed  by  Origen,  nor  any  other 
writer  of  Origen's  early  time,  they  lack  reliability. 

Certain  Church  Fathers  not  Ba2)tized  in  Infancy : — 
Dr.  A.  J.  Arnold  gives  the  following  list  of  such  : 
Jerome  (born  about  354)  ;  Augustine  (born  354)  ; 
Basil  (born  about  329)  ;  Gregory  Nazianzen  (born 
about  329)  ;  Nectarius  (fourth  century)  ;  Ephraim 
of  Edessa  (fourth  century)  ;  Emperor  Constantine 
(born  about  274)  ;  Emperor  Theodosius  (born  346)  ; 
and  the  Emperor  Valentinus  (born  321).  Dr.  Ar- 
nold tells  us  that  most  of  these  were  born  of  Chris- 
tian parents,  and  several  of  them  (Augustine,  Basil, 
Gregory,  Ephraim)  are  expressly  said  to  have  been 
consecrated  in  infancy.  He  also  tells  us  that  among 
all  the  Christian  fathers  of  the  first  five  hundred 
years,  not  one  of  them  is  said  to  have  been  baptized 
in  infancy.^ 

These  facts  cannot  prove  that  Infant  Baptism  was 
not  known  and,  more  or  less  practised  in  the  fourth 
and  fifth  centuries,  in  which  all  these  fathers  except 

lAug.  de  Peccator,  Meritis,  Remiss,  Liber  1,  c.  20. 
2  Bib.  Sacra,  Vol.  XXVI,  Jan.,  1869,  p.  73. 


HISTORICAL   ARGUMENT.  223 

Constantine,  lived,  for  the  reason  that   it  certainly 
was,  as  confessed  by  Baptists  themselves.^ 

(1).  Doubtless  some  of  them  were  not  the  children 
of  Christian  parents.  Those  of  Constantine  were 
pagans.  (2).  The  Christian  parents  of  some  of  them 
may  not  have  become  such  while  they  were  young 
children.  Some  may  have  had  only  one  parent  a 
Christian,  the  other  successfully  resisting  their  bap- 
tism. (4).  The  Christian  parents  of  some  may  have 
neglected  the  rite,  though  known  as  apostolic  in 
their  time.  This  non-baptism  of  Augustine  could 
not  have  been  because  the  rite  was  not  known  as 
apostolic  in  his  childhood,  as  he  himself  says  it  was, 
and  had  been  from  time  immemorial.  Such  possi- 
bilities harmonize  their  non-infant  baptisms  with  the 
proved,  and  here  assumed.  Scriptural  authority  of  the 
rite.  That  alone  makes  it  morally  certain  that  the 
rite,  thus  authorized,  was  then  known  and  practised 
as  apostolic. 

This  very  meagre  examination  of  the  writings  of 
the  first  five  centuries,  bearing  upon  the  subject, 
must  suffice.  As  made  in  our  original  manuscript  it 
would  cover  nearly  six  chapters  instead  of  one.  We 
regret  the  page-limitations  which  has  compelled  it. 
We  have  been  able  merely  to  touch  upon  a  few 
salient  points  in  each  case.  We  regret  the  brevity. 
While  a  very  subordinate  argument,  as  compared 
with  the  Scriptural,  it  is  yet  an  intensely  interesting 
one — more  and  more  so  as  more  and  more  fully 
developed.  This  is  especially  true  of  that  derived 
from   the    writings    of    Origen.      Its   long-continued 

iWiberg  on  Baptism,  pp.  236,  259. 


224  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

study  has  excited  in  iis  a  great  deal  of  pleasing 
enthusiasm,  and  afforded  a  very  delightful  satisfac- 
tion. We  have  been  exceedingly  gratified  to  find, 
by  means  of  a  very  prolonged  and  careful  investiga- 
tion, that  the  churches  in  those  early  ages  did  not 
suffer  this  scriptural  ordinance  to  fall  into  disuse, 
but,  on  the  contrary,  carefully  preserved  and  hon- 
ored it  as  a  precious  treasure  bequeathed  to  them. 

It  will  not  be  necessary  to  examine  the  writings 
of  succeeding  centuries  for  proof  of  its  practice, 
more  or  less  extensively  as  apostolic,  in  them  all,  as 
it  is  universally  confessed.  Some  other  very  impor- 
tant points,  however,  call  for  consideration,  and  will 
receive  it,  in  the  next  concluding  chapter. 


CHAPTER   XIV. 

Part  Second. 

OTHER   RELATED    HISTORICAL   FACTS:    CLOS- 
ING  AVORDS. 

High  Christian  Character  and  Achieve- 
ments OF  ALL  Genuine  Pedo-baptists,  as  seen 
IN  History. — It  will  not  be  denied  that  multitudes 
among  those  who  practise  it,  have  always  excelled  in 
piety  and  in  large  and  efficient  Christian  activities. 
Dr.  A.  J.  Arnold  (Baptist)  heartily  confesses  that  it 
is  "practised  by  a  body  of  churches  "  (certain  evan- 
gelical ones  in  Protestant  countries),  "who  have  not 
been  surpassed  by  any  body  of  Christians  in  ancient 
or  modern  times,  in  morality,  home  religion,  evan- 
gelical faith.  Christian  activities,  and  missionary  zeal.^ 
It  cannot  candidly  be  disputed  that  great  numbers 
of  the  most  godly  men  and  women  ever  known,  espe- 
cially saintly  missionaries  of  the  cross  and  others  full 
of  the  missionary  spirit,  have  practised  it  as  a  God- 
imposed  duty  and  an  unspeakabl}^  blessed  privilege. 
Hence  such  have  been,  all  along  in  the  past,  and  still 
are,  most  eloquent  and  decisive  historic  object-lessons 
setting  forth  its  great  power,  when  rightly  and  faith- 
fully used,  to  promote  growth  in  grace,  glowing  piety, 
intense  Christian  activities  and  the  successful  family 
training-  of  children  for  God. 

Ba2?tist  Pedo-haptists. — To  the  same  class,  as  ob- 
ject-lessons, also  belong  all  those  who  only,  yet  really, 

1  Bib.  Sac,  Jan.,  1869,  p.  77. 
16 


226  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

practise  its  substance,  as  is  true  with  all  faithful 
Christians  who  do  not  jjractise  its  ordinance-form.  All 
such  really  baptize  their  children.  Baptist  churches 
have  a  great  many  more  Pedo-baptist  members  than 
they  think,  including  all  of  those  godly  ones  who 
conscientiously  most  condemn  the  rite.  All  those 
among  them  who  consecrate  and  faithfully  train  their 
children  for  God,  in  humble  reliance  upon  his  prom- 
ises, obtain  the  blessings  sought  through  the  Abra- 
hamic  covenant,  though  they  see  it  not  in  that  light. 
The  substance  of  the  rite  is  the  all-important  thing. 
Its  form,  while  of  great  use,  is  not  so  indispensable 
but  that  those  practising  its  substance  alone,  reject- 
ing the  form  through  honest  mistake,  will  partake 
largely  of  the  benefits  of  the  rite.  The  form  is  sim- 
ply a  picture  of  the  substance,  helping  to  receive  and 
make  use  of  it.  While,  when  known  as  being  such 
by  divine  appointment,  it  cannot  be  neglected  with- 
out sin,  it  may  be  when  not  so  known.  The  testi- 
monies, then,  derived  from  the  character  and  achieve- 
ments of  all  genuine  Pedo-baptists — including  all 
those  who  so  practise  its  substance  alone — in  favor 
of  the  rite  as  scriptural,  are  numberless  and  of  very 
great  weight. 

Adverse  Testimony  of  Many  Church  His- 
torians ;  Neander  their  Representative. — 
Several  church  historians  affirm  that  Infant  Baptism 
was  not  known,  as  apostolic,  in  the  first  and  second 
centuries,  and,  only  to  a  limited  extent,  in  the  third. 
How  can  we  account  for  this  their  testimony  ? 
Among  those  thus  affirming,  Neander  is  most  dis- 
tinguished  because    of   his    great   learning,  exhaus- 


HISTORICAL   ARGUMENT.  227 

tive  research,  and  world-wide  renown.  We  may, 
therefore,  safely  consider  him  as  a  representative  of 
them  all,  and  examine  the  testimony  given  by  him 
as  such  a  representative. 

Under  the  Misleading  Guidance  of  the  Baptist 
Bible  Assumption. — Neander  investigates  under  the 
guidance  of  an  unfounded  Bible  assumption,  as  ap- 
pears from  the  following :  "  If  we  wish  to  ascertain 
from  whom  tliis  institution  (Infant  Baptism)  was 
originated,  we  would  say,  certainly  not  immediately 
from  Christ  himself.  Was,  it  from  the  primitive 
church  in  Palestine  from  an  injunction  given  by  the 
apostles  ?  But  among  Jewish  Christians  circumci- 
sion was  regarded  as  a  seal  of  the  covenant,  and 
hence  they  had  so  much  less  occasion  to  make  use  of 
another  dedication  of  their  children.  Could  it  have 
been  Paul  who,  first  among  Gentile  Christians,  intro- 
duced this  alteration  by  the  use  of  baptism  ?  But 
this  would  agree  least  of  all  with  the  peculiar  charac- 
teristics of  the  apostle."  ^ 

The  Answers  to  these  Questions  not  Difficult. — They 
are  put  by  him  as  insurmountable  objections ;  but  it 
seems  to  us  that  their  answers  by  Pedo-baptists  are 
very  CAddent  and  easy.  Infant  Baptism  did  not  origi- 
nate immediately  from  Christ  in  his  earthl}^  ministry. 
Its  origin  was  long  before  his  Advent  upon  earth. 
He  found  it  a  long-established  and  largely-practised 
rite  in  its  Abrahamic  form.  He  himself  received  it 
in  that  form.  He  also  recognized  it,  as  he  did  all 
the  rites  of  the  ancient  Church,  as  one  of  divine  ap- 
pointment.     The   pertinent   question    for    Neander 

1  Planting  and  Training  of  the  Christian  Church,  p.  102. 


228  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

was :  When,  and  under  whose  authority  did  its  prac- 
tice in  its  Christian  form  commence  ?  The  time  for 
that  was  not  in  Christ's  ministry,  as  we  have  shown 
in  the  Scriptural  Argument.  Neither  had  the  time 
come,  in  the  apostolic  age,  for  this  change  of  form, 
in  the  primitive  church  at  Jerusalem,  made  up  as  it 
was  of  Jewish  believers.  They  were  to  retain,  for  a 
while,  the  Abrahamic  form  of  their  fathers,  as  a  seal 
of  the  covenant.  Had  he  asked :  Did  the  change 
take  place  among  Gentiles  when  they  first  began  to 
become  Christians,  whose  children  were  not  to  be  cir- 
cumcised ?  he  would  have  hit  the  mark  exactly,  and 
he  would  have  found,  in  the  New  Testament,  house- 
hold baptisms  at  that  time  and  not  before,  and  among 
them  alone.  We  dknnot,  for  the  life  of  us,  find  any 
evidence  of,  or  conceive  of,  any  known  peculiar  char- 
acteristics of  the  Apostle  Paul,  which  would,  in  the 
least,  keep  him  from  recognizing  and  making  use  of 
such  a  change  as  legitimate  and  necessary,  in  the  cir- 
cumstances. It  rather  seems  certain  to  us,  in  view 
of  his  freedom  from  the  bondage  of  forms ;  his  keen 
perception  of  their  unchangeable  substance,  never  to 
cease ;  and  of  the  changeable  nature  of  all  forms, 
embodying  it, — that  he  especially  would  recognize 
such  a  change  of  form  in  circumcision  as  legitimate 
and  necessary,  when  and  where  it  was  so  impera- 
tively demanded. 

This  passage  of  Neander's  evidently  shows  that  he 
did  not  look  upon  Christian  baptism  as  identical  with 
circumcision  ;  nor  upon  the  outward  form  of  the  one 
as  a  duplicate  of  that  of  the  other ;  also,  that  he  did 
regard  the  rite  of  Infant  Baptism  as  non-apostolic. 


HISTORICAL   ARGUMENT.  229 

We  do  not  think  it  strange,  therefore,  that  he 
failed  to  find  the  rite  in  the  two  first  centuries.  If,  like 
him,  we  looked  upon  it  as  thus  destitute  of  Scriptural 
authority,  we  should  fail  to  find  it  there.  We  should 
enter  upon  the  study  of  the  fragmentary  records  of 
the  church  history  of  those  times  with  the  strongest 
presumption  against  its  being  then  known,  and  should 
interpret  them  accordingly.  Their  mere  silence 
would  be  decisive. 

His  Regretahle  Disparagement  of  Origen. — In  com- 
ing to  his  conclusion,  Neander  finds  it  necessary  to 
disparage  and  rule  out  the  remarkable  and  decisive 
testimony  of  Origen,  as  follows  :  "  His  expression 
[concerning  Infant  Baptism]  cannot  be  regarded  as 
of  much  weight  in  this  age,  when  the  inclination  was 
so  strong  to  trace  every  institution  which  w^as  con- 
sidered of  special  importance  to  the  apostles,  and 
when  so  many  walls  of  separation,  hindering  tlie 
freedom  of  prospect,  had  already  been  set  up  between 
this  and  the  apostolic  age."^ 

We  confess  to  a  feeling  of  deep  regret  to  find  him 
thus  disparaging  the  testimony  of  a  man  so  justly 
distinguished  for  his  great  learning  and  high  Chris- 
tian character;  and  the  fact  that  the  necessities  of 
his  argument  compelled  it,  destroys  our  confidence 
in  his  adverse  conclusions.  Does  he  mean  that 
Origen  was  not  intelligent  enough  to  give  accurate 
testimony  as  to  its  practice  in  the  middle  of  the 
second  centur}^  only  thirty-five  years  before  his 
birth?  It  does  not  seem  possible.  Or  does  he 
accuse  him  of  being  dishonest  enough  to  pronounce 

iHistory  of  Christian  Religion,  Vol.  1,  p.  314. 


230  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

the  rite  apostolic  when  he  knew  that  it  was  not 
practised  as  such  at  that  time  ?  If  he  can  be  taken  as 
a  competent  and  an  honest  witness,  then  it  is  certain, 
as  his  honesty  can  make  it,  that  it  was  known  and 
practised  as  apostolic  in  the  second  century ;  and  the 
opinion  of  Neander  to  the  contrary  cannot  be  well 
founded. 

We  must  be  permitted  to  repeat  with  emphasis 
our  painful  regret  that  such  an  eminent  historian 
should  thus  seem  to  impugn  either  the  intelligence 
or  the  character  of  that  learned  and  eminently  pious 
father.  It  appears  to  us  that  lie  let  his  mistaken 
Bible  assumption  press  him  into  a  very  uncharitable 
and  erroneous  judgment.  We  claim  that  the  adverse 
testimony  of  the  other  church  historians  was  owing  to 
causes  the  same  or  similar  to  these  just  considered. 

Its  Rejection  by  Baptist  Bodies. — Some  cen- 
turies before  the  Reformation  there  appeared  a  few 
Christians,  among  them  those  of  deep  piety,  and,  in 
time,  a  few  churches,  who  rejected  the  rite  as  un- 
scriptural  and  sinful.  From  such  small  fountains 
have  issued  streams,  constantly  growing  in  volume 
in  their  onward  flow,  until  there  have  resulted  those 
large  and  worthy  Christian  bodies  Avho  now  reject  it. 
While  this  is  not  their  only  distinguishing  tenet,  it 
is  one  of  the  most  noted  ones.  Why  has  this  been? 
How  account  for  its  rejection  by  so  large  and  excel- 
lent a  portion  of  God's  people,  if  it  is  so  surely  and 
evidently  Scriptural  as  is  claimed  in  this  treatise? 
There  are  many  reasons  for  it,  two  of  which  call  for 
special  consideration. 

(1).  Incori-ect  Misleading  Vietvs  of  Baptism. — They 


HISTORICAL   ARGUMENT.  231 

did  not  see  both  sides  of  the  baptismal  symboh 
Those  godly  fathers  saw  but  one  side  of  baptism, 
and  hence  were  naturally  misled  into  their  erroneous 
views  and  their  secession  from  their  brethren.  Half 
truths,  in  the  minds  of  conscientious  men,  are  fruit- 
ful sources  of  error — all  the  more  so  because  of  their 
conscientiousness.  Their  readiness  to  run  into 
errors  because  of  one-sided  views,  and  their  persist- 
ency in  clinging  to  them,  correspond  to  the  degree 
of  their  conscientiousness.  Those  saintly  men  rightly 
emphasized  the  necessity  of  faith  on  the  part  of  the 
subject  to  his  valid  baptism,  but  they  failed  ade- 
quately to  emphasize,  and  even  to  perceive,  the  co- 
ordinate truth,  that,  for  probationary  purposes, 
symbols  of  faith  may,  and,  in  some  instances,  must 
be  given  to  those  destitute  of  it. 

A  Strange  Inconsistency^  involving  an  Absurdity. — 
They  did  not  see  this  co-ordinate  truth  although 
they  necessarily  acted  upon  it  every  day,  as  in  teach- 
ing their  children  to  pray.  Holding  such  incomplete 
views,  they  were  driven  by  their  consciences  and 
their  fear  of  God,  to  reject  it.  The  same  veil  has 
continued  to  blind  and  keep  in  like  error  their 
numerous  and  excellent  descendants  down  to  the 
present  time.  If  they  would  make  the  attempt  fully 
to  carry  out  their  one-sided  view  to  its  legitimate 
length,  they  would  run  into  a  thousand  absurdities 
too  glaring  for  even  their  own  approval,  as  did  the 
saintly  Roger  Williams. ^ 
(i)  The  to  them  Unsatisfactory  Character  of  all  Treat- 
ises   in   its    iSupjJort. — -Baptists    condemn    all   those 

iSee  p.  11  of  this  treatise. 


232  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

treatises  as  not  meeting  tlie  reasonable  demands  of 
their  minds.  They  go  to  them  to  learn  how  a  sym- 
bol of  a  believer  can  be  rightly  given  to  non-believ- 
ing, even  to  unbelieving,  children :  how  the  initia- 
tory rite  of  church-membersliip  can  be  rightly  given 
to  them ;  how  such  can  be  rightly  baptized  into  the 
holy  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit. 
They  go  to  them  for  adequate  Bible  proof-texts. 
When  they  find  the  commandment  of  circumcision 
cited  as  such,  they  call  for  conclusive  proof  that  it  is 
now  binding;  especially  that  it  is  in  the  form  of 
Christian  baptism.  They  demand  to  be  shown 
either  that  all  Old  Testament  precepts  are  now  bind- 
ing, or  else  a  good  reason  why  this  is,  while  others 
are  not.  They  call  for  a  rule  of  interpretation 
founded  upon  universally  acknowledged  principles, 
which  shall  make  the  line,  if  an}^  separating  the 
binding  from  the  non-binding,  clear  and  unmistaka- 
ble. They  point  to  the  absence  of  any  recorded  in- 
stances of  Infant  Baptisms  in  the  ministries  of  John 
the  Baptist,  Christ,  and  (as  they  claim),  his  apostles, 
and  they  strenuously  insist  that  the  treatises  must 
satisfactorily  account  for  an  absence  which  seems  to 
conflict  fatally  with  the  claims  of  the  rite.  They 
also  call  for  a  fair  consideration  and  an  effectual 
refutation  of  all  the  formidable  objections  which  its 
rejecters  profess  to  derive  from  the  Bible  and  eccle- 
siastical history.  They  say  that  these  objections 
must  all  be  fully  met  if  they  would  satisfy  thinking, 
conscientious  minds.  They  complain  that  upon  all 
these  points  they  find  nothing  which  satisfies,  or 
ought,  in  reason,  to  satisfy  their  inquiring  minds. 


HISTORICAL   AllGUMENT.  233 

It  is  an  undeniable  fact  that  all  Baptists,  including 
their  most  logical  and  candid  scholars,  look  upon 
the  arguments  put  forth  in  advocacy  of  the  rite  with 
great  disrespect,  not  to  say  contempt.  Who  can  tell 
how  great  the  number  like  Judson  and  Hackett, 
whose  views  have  been  changed  to  those  of  the  Bap- 
tists by  these  treatises?  It  is,  then,  as  it  unques- 
tionably must  be,  true  that  just  here  we  find  another 
reason  for  the  rejection  of  the  rite  by  a  few  con- 
scientious, godly  men  in  the  earlier  ages  of  the 
church ;  and  for  its  widespread  rejection  in  more 
recent  centuries. 

Whether  or  not  Baptists  are  justified  in  making 
such  a  sweeping,  damaging  charge,  may  be  ques- 
tioned; but  the  fact  that  they  with  united  voice 
and  evident  sincerity  do  make  it,  is  calculated 
greatly  to  hinder  and  diminish  its  observance.  By 
such  damaging  criticisms  they  do  and  must  have 
great  influence  in  the  case,  and  will  continue  thus  to 
do  so  long  as  they  find  no  satisfactory  refutation  of 
these  their  objections. 

It  does  not  become  us  to  pronounce  them  all  well- 
founded ;  but  we  ma}',  with  perfect  propriety,  say 
that  we  have  never  found  any  treatises  in  which 
these  objections  have  been  fairly  and  squarely  met, 
much  less  removed.  We  are  compelled  to  confess  to 
receiving  but  little  light  upon  the  subject  from  all 
those  we  have  read.  This  may  be  wholly  owing  to 
our  limited  acquaintance  with  the  numberless  ones 
which  have  been  published;  or  to  our  inability  to 
understand  and  fully  appreciate  those  examined. 
Whether  or  not  better  abilities   and  a  more   exten- 


234  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

sive  reading  would  have  led  us  to  a  different  judg- 
ment, we  leave  for  others  to  decide. 

Its  Non-Observance  by  Many  in  Pedo-bap- 
TiST  Chubches. 

Non-  Observance. — Its  large  non-observance  in  many 
Pedo-baptist  churches  at  the  present  time  must  be 
confessed,  and  is  owing,  in  part,  to  that  tendency  to 
neglect  acknowledged  duties  which  prevails  more  or 
less  in  all  churches.  It  is  largely  for  the  same  cause 
that  the  Lord's  Supper,  the  family  altar,  secret 
prayer,  etc.,  are  now  so  greatly,  sadly,  and  increas- 
ingly neglected.  It  is  also  owing  largely  to  a  want 
of  confidence  in  the  rite  as  Scriptural.  It  cannot  be 
denied  that  many  in  those  churches,  both  clergymen 
and  laymen,  do  not  have  much  confidence  in  its 
claims  to  Bible  authority,  and  that  many  positively 
deny  tliat  it  has  such  authority.  This  widespread 
want  of  confidence,  and  these  decided  denials,  could 
but  result,  as  they  have,  very  disastrously  as  to  its 
observance.  This  state  of  things  in  the  churches 
comes  largely  from  the  same  cause  —  those  just  men- 
tioned—  which  occasioned  its  first  and  subsequent 
rejection  by  Baptists,  —  one-sided  views  and  unsatis- 
factory treatises  upon  the  subject.  Such  views  and 
such  dissatisfaction  have  greatly  tended  to  bring, 
and  actually  have  brought  about,  its  large  rejection 
and  larger  neglect. 

The  Great  Necessity  of  the  Rite, — The  great  and 
crying  want  of  the  rite  to-day  is  a  treatise  which,  iyi 
the  judgrtient  of  all  fair-minded  scholars^  gives  it  a 
sure  Bible  foundation,  and  removes  the  many  appa- 


HISTORICAL   ARGUME>^T.  235 

rently  great  objections  urged  against  it.  Not  until 
that  is  done  will  its  observance  become  as  general  in 
the  churches  as  it  was  in  former  times.  When  that 
is  done,  it  will  begin  to  increase,  and,  as  we  think, 
keep  on  increasing  until  instances  of  its  non-observ- 
ance by  candid,  faithful  Christians  will  be  rare  in- 
deed. In  all  its  history  it  has  shown  itself  as  meet- 
ing, when  rightly  used,  a  great  and  deeply-felt  want 
in  the  experiences  of  living  Christians.  It  has  al- 
ways had,  and  still  has,  a  warm  place  in  the  hearts 
of  all  those  so  using  it,  notwithstanding  the  many 
difficulties  calculated  to  shake  their  confidence  in 
its  divine  authority.  One  very  strong  and  convinc- 
ing proof  of  its  being  from  God  is  the  fact  that  it 
has,  in  such  unfavorable  circumstances,  even  to  the 
present  time,  retained  its  strong  hold  upon  so  many 
of  the  most  intelligent,  purest,  most  spiritual,  and 
most  useful  of  God's  chosen  ones. 

Two  Additional  Causes. — There  are  two  other 
causes  for  this,  its  non-observance,  in  Pedo-baptist 
churches  :  (1).  They,  in  their  liberalit}^,  often  receive 
Baptists  to  their  membership.  Many  of  the  latter 
unite  with  them  while  retaining  most  of  their  Bap- 
tist views.  Nearly  all  such  do  so  as  rejecters  of 
Infant  Baptism.  Many  others  come  into  them  who 
were  reared  in  Baptist  communities  and  families, — 
many  who  in  their  earlier  years  were  attendants  in 
Baptist  meetings  and  Sabbath  schools.  The  large 
inflowing  of  all  these  classes  naturally  and  inevit- 
ably leavened,  more  or  less,  with  Baptist  views  the 
churches  into  which  they  came. 

(2).  They  have  suffered  in  this  respect  from  their 


236  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

neighborhood  with  Baptist  churches.  The  neigh- 
borhood of  large  and  influential  ones,  noted  for  their 
spirituality  and  self-denying  labors  in  the  cause  of 
their  Master,  yet  rejecting  the  rite  as  anti-Scriptural 
and  sinful,  could  not,  as  it  did  not,  fail  to  make  it 
more  difficult  to  secure  its  universal  observance,  and 
this  accounts,  in  part,  for  its  so  large  rejection  and 
neglect. 

A  Similar  Experience  in  Baptist  Churches. — Our 
Baptist  brethren  have  a  similar  experience  with  re- 
spect to  their  so  distinctive  doctrine,  —  Close  Com- 
munion. Their  reception  of  some  who  reject  it,  and 
of  many  more  who  are  not  fully  satisfied  as  to  its 
Bible  authority,  and  the  neighborhood  of  worthy 
Christian  churches  which  reject  it  as  anti-Scriptural, 
has  made  it  much  more  difficult  to  maintain  its  uni- 
versal acceptance  and  practice.  Because  of  these 
silent,  yet  ever-acting,  influences,  the  leaven  of  open 
communion  has  worked,  and  will  continue  to  do  so, 
more  and  more  in  their  churches.  It  is  not  strange, 
therefore,  that  this  rite  is  not  accepted  and  practised 
as  Scriptural  by  all  those  in  Pedo-baptist  churches, 
and  the  fact  that  it  is  not,  constitutes  no  serious 
objection  to  it  as  such. 

Summary  Statement'. — 1.  All  the  facts  of  church 
history  can  be  interpreted  in  harmony  with  the 
assumption  that  Infant  Baptism  is  a  Scriptural  ordi- 
nance. 

2.  While  a  few  of  th'em  are  more  easily  interpreted 
upon  the  Baptist  than  the  Pedo-baptist  Bible  assump- 
tion, the  great  majority  are  more  easily  upon  the 
latter  than  the  former. 


HISTORICAL   ARGUMENT.  237 

3.  The  proved  Scriptural  authority  of  the  rite 
fully  establishes  the  claim  that  all  of  them  are  actu- 
ally in  such  harmony. 

This  great  preponderance  of  historical  testimony 
in  favor  of  the  ordinance  gives  very  weighty  cor- 
roborative proof  of  its  Scriptural  authority. 

Closing  AVords. — The  completion  of  this  His- 
torical ,  Argument,  to  which  we  have  now  come, 
brino-s  this  whole  treatise  to  its  close.     In  it  we  have 

o 

endeavored  to  give  the  subject  a  thorough  and  an 
impartial  investigation.  We  took  up  the  work  be- 
cause sorely  perplexed  with  the  objections  urged 
against  it,  by  such  eminently  Christian  scholars  as 
Judson,  Ripley,  Hackett,  and  others,  —  men  Avhose 
sincerity,  learning,  hearty  consecration  to  Christ  and 
lives  of  great  usefulness,  as  his  accepted  and  hon- 
ored servants,  were  such  as  to  give  presumptive  evi- 
dence of  great  weight  for  the  correctness  of  their 
views.  The  fear  of  administering  an  unauthorized 
rite  haunted  us  at  the  very  threshold  of  the  gospel 
ministry,  into  which  we  entered,  and  in  which  we, 
as  we  humbly  trust,  have  been  a  real,  though  a  very 
unworthy,  co-worker  with  Christ.  So  much  were 
we  troubled  by  these  objections  and  fears,  that  we 
were  driven  by  conscience  and  the  fear  of  God  to 
the  solemn  resolve  that  we  would  examine  the  sub- 
ject as  carefully,  exhaustively,  honestly,  and  prayer- 
fully as  we  possibly  could,  and,  in  case  no  Scriptural 
warrant  for  it  was  found,  we  would  tear  it  from  our 
creed,  whatever  the  sacrifices  of  feeling  and  interest 
it  might  cost.  We  had  not  labored  long  upon  this 
effort  before  light  began  to  break  in  upon  our  minds  ; 


238  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

at  first  dim,  but  surely  increasing  as  studying  pro- 
gressed. 

We  soon  had  enough  revealed  by  that  blessed 
Spirit  which  leadeth  into  all  truth,  to  remove  our 
fears  about  administering  the  rite.  This  led  us  to 
keep  on  in  our  studies  and  obtain  as  complete  a 
knowledge  of  the  subject  as  we  could — its  philos- 
ophy, its  Scriptural  authority,  its  historical  confirm- 
ations, the  objections  urged  against  it,  etc.  We  have 
been  abundantly  rewarded  for  these  great  labors  and 
pains,  all  along  the  way,  by  the  new  and  delightful 
views  of  truth  so  frequently  brought  to  light.  It 
has  been  an  unspeakable  joy  to  find,  as  we  have,  in 
reason,  in  the  Bible  and  in  history — more  and  more 
clearly  as  we  went  on — such  a  sure  foundation  for 
the  precious  ordinance ;  to  witness  the  happy  solu- 
tions of  its  difficult  and  perplexing  problems  ever 
and  anon  unveiling  themselves  to  our  eager  eyes ; 
sometimes  very  unexpectedly ;  often  bursting  upon 
our  burdened  mind  with  enrapturing  surprise. 

We  desire,  in  closing,  to  render  heartfelt  praise 
and  thanksgiving  to  God  for  sparing  our  lives  to  see 
the  completion  of  this  treatise  ;  for  all  the  help  He 
has  afforded  us  in  its  elaboration ;  and  for  the  loving 
guidance  He  has  given  us,  as  we  fully  believe,  in  all 
our  prolonged  search  for  the'  truth  in  the  case — the 
whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth.  To  Him 
alone  be  all  the  glory.  With  Him  we  cheerfully 
leave  it.  To  His  ever-watchful,  loving  care  we  com- 
mit it,  with  the  earnest  prayer  that  He  will  make  it 
instrumental  in  securing  a  greater  and  more  faithful 
Christian  nurture  of  children  in  the  churches  of  His 
well-beloved  Son,  Jesus  Christ. 


APPENDIX   A. 

Baptizing  Non-Believing  Children  into  the 
Name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Spirit  !     How  Justified  ?  . 

In  the  Argument  from  Reason,  a  justification  of 
it  as  not  inherently  wrong,  was  derived  from  the  ac- 
knowledged rightfulness  of  teaching  them  to  pray. 
Since  the  near  completion  of  this  treatise,  what  we 
regard  as  important  new  light  upon  this  question, 
has  been  given  us.  We  cannot  now  conveniently  in- 
sert it  in  its  proper  place  and,  therefore,  give  it  in  an 
appendix.  We  shall  consider  it,  as  we  did  all  the 
other  parts  of  that  Argument  from  Reason,  on  the 
assumption  that  Infant  Baptism  has  Scriptural  au- 
thority ;  also,  that  Christian  baptism  and  circumci- 
sion are  identical.  The  great  point  we  propose  to 
make  is  tliis  :  All  moral  beings  are  in  the  name  of 
the  Holy  Trinity  and,  for  that  reason,  it  cannot  be 
necessarily  wrong  to  induct  such  children  into  it,  as 
is  done  in  their  baptism. 

To  be  in  the  name  of  another  is  to  bear,  or  be 
called  by,  his  name ;  to  be  inducted  into  it  is  to  re- 
ceive it  as  one's  own.  All  moral  beings,  good  and 
bad,  are  citizens  of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  its  most 
inclusive  dimensions.  While  in  its  restricted  sense, 
as  generally  described  in  the  Bible,  it  includes  only 
God  and  his  loyal  subjects  ;  in  its  widest  sense  it  in- 
cludes all  who  owe  allegiance  to  God  as  their  right- 


240  APPENDIX. 

fill  sovereign.  No  rebellion,  however  wicked  and 
permanent,  absolves  them  from  this  their  debt  of 
allegiance. 

All  the  citizens  of  an  earthly  kingdom  bear  the 
name  of  their  king.  All  Englishmen,  loyal  or  dis- 
loyal, are  "  Victoria's  subjects."  That  is  the  real 
and  legitimate  name  of  every  one  of  them. 

In  that  their  double  name  they  bear  the  name 
"  Victoria  "  as  their  queen ;  they  also  bear  the  name 
"  subjects "  to  distinguish  themselves  from  her,  as 
those  under  lier  dominion.  So  all  moral  beings,  holy 
or  sinful,  are  "  God's  subjects."  That  is  their  true 
name,  and,  in  bearing  it,  they  bear  his  name.  Every 
moral  being,  however  much  depraved,  is  "  God's  im- 
age." That  is  his  real  name,  and,  in  bearing  it,  he 
bears  his  name.  Every  one,  good  or  bad,  is  rightly 
designated  as  "  God's  child,"  and  so  bears  his  name. 

Children  all  bear  the  name  of  tlieir  parents  as  their 
patronymic  or  surname  ;  so  all  the  children  of  God 
in  like  manner  bear  his  name. 

The  names  of  God,  as  borne  by  his  creatures,  are 
always  of  a  derivative  form,  or  otherwise  so  qualified 
as  to  sharply  distinguish  them  from  those  borne -by 
God  alone.  See  Psalm  82:67;  John  10:39.  A 
disciple  of  Christ  bears  his  name ;  but,  in  doing 
so,  he  is  not  called  Christ,  but  a  Christian,  or  a 
Chris t-ite.  So  beings  bearing  God's  name  bear  it  in 
a  derived  form.  If  Queen  Victoria  were  a  perfectly 
absolute  monarch,  herself  alone  the  entire  govern- 
ment,— and  if  her  reign  ran  back,  and  was  to  run  for- 
ward, many  ages,  her  subjects  might,  and  doubtless 
would  all,  be  called  "  Victorians  "  ;  bearing  her  name 


APPENDIX.  241 

rather  than  that  of  their  country.  That  would  be 
their  true  name.  For  a  like  reason  all  moral  beings, 
without  exception,  bear  the  name  of  their  divine  sov- 
ereign— God.  As  the  name  of  God  is  Father^  Son^ 
and  Holy  Sjm'it^  they  actually  bear  that  same  name 
in  a  derived  form.  Speaking  after  the  manner  of 
men,  they  are  Triune  Godonians.  We  use  this  coined 
name,  and  we  wish  to  do  so  most  reverently,  because 
it  so  exactly  expresses  the  thought  intended,  and  is 
so  easily  understood.  AVe  do  not  mean  that  they 
ever  are,  or  should  often  be,  literally  addressed  by  it, 
but  that  they  virtually  are  so  designated.  A  man 
accepting  the  theology  of  Calvin  may  never  have 
been  called  a  Calvinist,  but  he  is  one  and  that  is  his 
true  name  all  the  same.  If  the  name  Calvinist  had 
never  been  spoken  nor  known,  the  adherents  of  Cal- 
vin would  so  bear  his  name  notwithstandine. 

What  we  have  just  said  is,  as  it  seems  to  us,  con- 
firmed in  Psalm  82 :  6,  7.  Men  are  there  rightly 
called  gods,  because  they  are  all  sons  of  the  Most  High. 
But  their  name  is  evidently  a  derived  one,  equiva- 
lent to  godites.  The  Psalmist  points  them  to  their 
glorious  name  as  the  sons  of  God  ;  but,  at  the  same 
time,  seeks  to  keep  them  humble,  by  assuring  them 
that  they  shall  die  like  men. 

That  of  the  Triune  God  borne  by  all,  is,  and  ever 
must  be,  a  most  holy  name  in  the  case  of  every  moral 
being,  good  or  bad.  The  most  wicked  neither  do 
nor  can  impair  its  holiness  in  the  least ;  but  they 
may  and  do  cast  upon  it  dishonor  corresponding,  in 
its  magnitude,  to  their  wickedness.  Christ,  as  God, 
confers  upon  it  infinite  honor  by  his  divine  character 
17 


242  APPENDIX. 

and  works.  With  him  it  is  original,  not  derived. 
As  man  he  by  the  same  means  honors  it  as  it  could 
not  possibly  be  by  any  created  being.  It  is,  also,  a 
name  imposing  great  and  fearful  responsibilities  upon 
every  moral  being,  because  bearing  it.  It  demands 
a  corresponding  holy  life  and  character. 

The  great  calling  of  every  one  is  to  honor  and 
make  glorious  by  his  life  and  character,  that  holy 
name  which  he  bears  ;  not  to  glory  in  it  with  selfish 
pride,  but  to  glorify  it  with  unselfish  regard  for  the 
name  as  worth}^  of  all  the  glory  which  can  possibly 
be  bestowed  upon  it. 

In  striving  to  do  this,  he  has  for  his  justification 
and  blessedness  the  example  of  his  God  himself,  who 
is  ever  striving  to  glorify  his  own  name.  This  is  one 
of  the  great  motives  of  his  being,  for  the  reason  that 
its  glory  greatly  contributes  to  its  infinite  power  for 
good.  The  more  his  creatures  see  its  glory,  the  more 
influential  for  their  good  it  becomes  to  them.  When 
the  Psalmist  prayed  "  quicken  me  for  thy  name's 
sake,"  he  appealed  to  one  of  the  strongest  and  holi- 
est passions  of  his  divine  nature. 

A  being  constantly  growing  in  likeness  to  God, 
decks  that  holy  name  which  he  bears  witli  new  robes 
of  honor  and  glory,  and,  in  that  sense,  makes  it  a 
new  name  every  day.  A  sinful  man  by  becoming  a 
Christian,  so  transforms  it,  in  its  attire,  that  it  be- 
comes in  that  sense  preeminently  a  new  one  to  him — 
the  old  one  clad  in  its  filthy  rags  forced  upon  it,  re- 
clothed  in  garments  clean  and  most  comely.  He 
has  entered  into  a  new  name. 

The  Bible  enjoins  baptism,  as,  like  circumcision. 


APPENDIX.  243 

a  symbol  of  three,  and  only  three,  of  all  the  classes  of 
moral  beings  bearing  that  name,  viz.:  Christ,  regen- 
erated men,  and  their  covenant  children.  Christian 
baptism,  therefore,  symbolizes  its  subjects  as  bearing 
that  name,  and  in  so  doing,  also,  necessarily  symbol- 
izes those  characteristics  of  theirs  which  make  them 
proper  subjects  of  it.  (1).  It  symbolizes  Christ  as 
bearing  it  in  common  with  all  moral  beings,  and,  also, 
as  the  divine  Son  of  God.  As  the  Son  of  man  it 
symbolizes  all  involved  in  his  work  of  redemption. 
(2).  It  symbolizes  regenerated  men  as  bearing  that 
name  of  God  in  common  with  all  moral  beings.  It 
also  symbolizes  that  new  birth  of  theirs  by  which 
their  previous  dishonoring  that  holy  name,  borne  by 
them,  was  changed  into  its  being  greatly  honored 
and  made  a  new  one  b}^  their  changed  characters  and 
lives.  It  also  symbolizes  that  work  of  Christ  and  the 
Hol}^  Spirit,  through  which  that  cliange  was  secured. 
Their  baptism,  therefore,  is  an  initiation  into  that  old 
name  made  over  in  new  attire  b}^  them  through  the 
grace  of  God.  (3).  It  symbolizes  the  covenant 
children  of  believers  as  bearing  that  same  common 
name.  Most  of  those  thus  symbolized  are  non- 
believing  children.  In  their  case  it  also  symbolizes 
their  promised  new  birth  and  their  future  honoring 
and  making  new  that  holy  name  which  they  bear. 
It  also  symbolizes  their  parental  consecration,  the 
covenant  promises  secured  for  them,  etc.  It  also 
S3aubolizes  that  work  of  Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit 
upon  which  those  promises  rest. 

Now  we  ask:     Where  is  the  necessarily  wrong  in 
this?     It  cannot  be  thus  wrong  to  pronounce  them 


244  APPENDIX. 

as  bearing  that  name  which  they  are,  and  always 
must  be,  bearing ;  no  more  so  than  it  could  be  to 
pronounce  them  as  bearing  the  image  of  God,  which 
they  do,  as  confessed  by  all.  These  two  cases  are, 
as  it  seems  to  us,  exactly  parallel,  and  as  none  will 
deny  its  rightfulness  in  the  one,  there  can  be  no 
inherent  wrong  in  the  other,  and  so  it  may  be  right- 
fully enjoined  by  God.  It  cannot  be  inherently 
wrong  to  set  forth,  by  symbol,  their  promised  new 
birth,  parental  consecration,  covenant  promises  re- 
specting them,  the  related  work  of  Christ,  etc. 

True,  the  baptism  given  to  them  does  not,  in  all 
respects,  express  the  same  things  as  when  given  to 
believers ;  neither  does  it,  as  given  to  the  latter,  ex- 
press the  same  things  in  all  respects  as  when  given 
to  Christ.  But  as  that  confessedly  constitutes  no 
objection  in  the  one  case,  it  need  not  in  the  other. 
There  are  no  false  statements  made  nor  involved. 
It  is  not  pretended  that  they  are  in  the  name  of  the 
Triune  God  as  believers,  but  as  moral  beings,  and 
as  the  children  of  the  covenant,  which  is  certainly 
true  of  them. 

If  the  views  whicli  have  here  been  maintained  are 
correct,  as  we  think  they  are,  then  a  great  and  a  very 
formidable  apparent  objection  to  Infant  Baptism, 
viz.,  that  it  inducts  non-believing  children  into  the 
holy  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  of 
which  so  much  is  made,  is  entirely  destitute  of 
validity,  and  need  not  in  the  least  shake  our  confi- 
dence in  the  Scriptural  authority  of  the  rite. 

We  regard  this  objection  to  Infant  Baptism, 
founded    upon    the    baptismal   formula,    as    a   very 


APPENDIX.  245 

'serious  one.  That  formula  certainly  pronounces 
them  in  the  name  of  the  Holy  Trinity.  If  they  are 
not  in  it,  then  a  falsehood  is  involved.  It  affirms 
what  is  not  true.  It  seems,  on  the  face  of  it,  strange 
and  unaccountable  that  such  children  should  be  bap- 
tized into  that  sacred  name,  with  the  necessary  im- 
plication that  they  remain  in  it  all  through  life, 
whether  or  not  they  ever  become  believers.  If  a 
failure  to  become  such  in  after  life  takes  them  out  of 
that  name,  it  would  seem  to  follow  that  their  not 
being  such  should  have  prevented  their  entering  it 
when  children. 

All  thoughtful  and  candid  Pedo-baptists,  who  have 
thoroughly  studied  the  true  nature  and  force  of  this 
objection,  must  be  deeply  impressed  with  its  formid- 
able character.  They  must  feel  themselves  under 
the  necessit}^  of  showing  a  sense  in  which  they  ac- 
tually do  bear  that  name,  which  shall  satisfy  the 
demands  of  reason  and  Scripture.  This  we  have 
endeavored  to  do  in  this  appendix.  We  need  not 
be  a  prophet,  nor  the  son  of  a  prophet,  to  predict, 
with  conscious  certainty,  that  some,  perhaps  many, 
Pedo-baptists  will  be  dissatisfied  with  the  sense  here 
given,  and  reject  it.  To  such  we  tender  our  best 
wishes  in  their  search  for  a  better  one. 

Let  the  reader  not  fail  to  perceive  that  the  objec- 
tion does  not  depend  upon  the  soundness  of  this 
appendix  for  its  refutation.  It  is  completely  refuted 
by  an  analogy  drawn  from  teaching  such  children  to 
pray,  as  we  have  before  shown.  At  the  same  time, 
the  appendix,  if  sound,  is  of  great  importance  in  the 
case,  because  it  explains,  in  a    different   way   and 


246  APPENDIX. 

more  at  length,  how  they  may  be  baptized  into  that 
holy  name.  The  analogy  shows  it  not  inherently 
wrong  because  substantially  the  same  as  teaching 
them  to  pray ;  but  the  appendix  seeks  to  show  the 
same  by  giving  the  formula  an  unusual  interpreta- 
tion, and,  if  successful,  can  but  be  of  great  impor- 
tance. If  unsuccessful,  then  that  from  the  analogy 
remains  unshaken  and  sufficient. 


APPENDIX  B. 

For  of  Such  is  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven. 

There  are  those  who  interpret  Christ's  words : 
"  For  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven,"  as  teaching 
that  all  little  children  are  literally  citizens  of  that 
kingdom,  and  from  this  infer  that  all  of  them  are,  of 
themselves,  entitled  to  baptism,  irrespective  of  the 
agency  and  character  of  their  parents.  We  admit 
that  this  inference  comes  logically  from  their  inter- 
pretation, but  we  think  the  latter  an  incorrect  one. 
Little  children,  because  of  their  negative  innocence, 
diminutive  physical  size,  and  strength,  and  instinc- 
tively confiding  spirit,  are  indeed  very  charming  and 
impressive  symbols  of  those  who  are  positively  inno- 
cent, little  and  weak  in  their  own  esteem,  triumph- 
antly trusting  in  God.  For  that  reason  all  in  the 
kingdom,  not  excepting  angels,  archangels,  and 
Christ  himself,  are  such  little  children  as  he  took  up 
and  blessed.  They  are  such  for  a  like  reason  that 
God  is  a  "  rock,"  a  "  sun,"  etc.,  because  of  their  re- 
semblance at  some  few  points.^  ^But  to  have  Christ 
say  that  those  infants  (Luke  13  :  15)  were  literally 
citizens  of  that  kingdom,  is  to  make  him  say  what 
could  not  be  true.  No  one  too  young  to  be  a  moral 
being,  can  be.     That  kingdom  is  made  up  wholly  of 

1  The  smitten  Rock  of  the  Wilderness  was  Christ— a  symbol  of  Him; 
and  Christ  was  that  Rock.  That  Rock  followed  the  Children  of  Israel 
in  all  their  Wilderness  wanderings— not  the  literal  Rock,  but  the  Christ 
symbolized  by  it,  followed  them.    1  Cor.  10:  4. 


248  APPENDIX. 

moral  beings.  Children  are  prospective  citizens  of 
God's  kingdom  in  its  h^oad  sense,  as  including  all 
those  who  owe  allegiance  to  God  as  their  rightful 
king — all  moral  beings,  both  good  and  bad — and  will 
become  real  ones  when  they  come  to  be  moral  beings. 
Those  who  will,  in  the  future,  become  believers,  are 
prospective  members,  in  its  restricted  scriptural  sense, 
as  including  only  loyal  ones,  and  will  become  real 
citizens  of  it  when  they  come  to  believe,  but  not 
before.  The  kingdom  of  heaven,  as  defined  by 
Christ,  is  made  up  solely  of  the  poor  in  spirit,  those 
persecuted  for  righteousness'  sake,  and  all  those 
alone,  who  possess,  to  some  degree,  a  like  character. 

As  God's  creation,  they  can  and  do  bear  his  name ; 
but,  not  being  moral  beings,  they  cannot  be  citizens 
of  that  kingdom  which  Christ  recognized  as  not  of 
the  world,  but  as  those  chosen  out  of  the  world. 

We  do  not  believe  that  the  disciples,  in  their  re- 
buking, intended  any  unkindness,  or  did  that  which 
most  good  men  would  not  have  done.  They  acted 
through  misapprehension.  They  may  have  objected 
to  their  thus  bringing  their  children  because  an  un- 
usual proceeding,  or  because  of  the  Saviour's  weari- 
ness, or  to  guard  against  his  interruptions  in  his 
teachings,  or  becawse  the  mothers  seemed  to  them 
weak  minded,  and  their  proceedings  to  have  an  air  of 
silliness.  Doubtless  there  was  some  degree  of  super- 
stition in  what  they  did — a  feeling  that  his  touch 
would  have  a  magic  effect.  But  whatever  the  facts 
and  however  repulsive  to  the  disciples,  not  so  with 
the  blessed  Saviour.  To  his  heart  of  infinite  tender- 
ness, and  his  unlimited  breadth  of  view,  those  fond 


APPENDIX.  249 

mothers  were  not  beneath  his  notice  nor  their  efforts 
to  come  to  him  with  their  chiklren  out  of  place.  He, 
therefore,  kindly  rebuked  his  rebuking  disciples  and 
took  up  the  little  ones  in  his  arms  and  blessed  them, 
as  charming  symbols  of  all  those  in  his  kingdom. 

Suppose  there  had  been,  in  that  same  gathering, 
some  demented,  aged  women  who  made  a  fetish  of 
mustard  seed,  always  carrying  it  with  them  and  ob- 
trusively showing  it  to  all  they  met.  Suppose  them 
holding  it  out  to  Christ  for  his  blessing  and  asking 
him  to  put  his  hands  upon  it.  We  venture  the  opin- 
ion that  he  would  not  have  approved  of  any  rebuke 
made  by  any  one,  but  would,  in  tender  sympathy, 
have  bidden  them  welcome ;  taking  it  and  putting  his 
hand  upon  it,  because  thus  giving  them  pleasure — 
their  happiness  his  happiness. 

We  feel  certain  that  he  would  have  said,  reprov- 
ingly, to  any  one  rebuking  them :  ''  Suffer  them  to 
bring  their  loved  mustard  to  me,  for  of  such  is  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.  Have  not  I,  myself,  in  parable, 
held  it  up  as  a  symbol  of  that  kingdom  ?  "  As  we 
picture  to  ourselves  the  supposed  touching  scene,  we 
hear  him,  in  the  joy  of  his  heart,  responding  :  "Father, 
I  thank  thee  that  thou  hast  hid  these  things  from  the 
wise  and  prudent  and  hast  revealed  them  unto  babes. 
Even  so  Father,  for  so  it  seemed  good  in  thy  sight." 
Anything  and  everything  picturing  to  him  that  king- 
dom, dearer  to  him  than  the  apple  of  his  eye,  was  un- 
speakably precious.  He  saw  in  the  apparently  so 
trivial  offering  of  these  weak  sisters,  a  glad  symbolic 
prophecy  of  all  men  bringing  their  most  costly  heart- 
offerings  to  him  as  their  sovereign  king. 


250  APPENDIX. 

Not  that  they  had  the  remotest  conception  of  the 
significance  of  their  seed  and  of  their  bringing  it,  as 
interpreted  by  him,  yet  they  pictured  it,  all  the  same, 
and,  therefore,  were  so  unspeakably  pleasing. 

The  idea  has  been  derived  from  the  words  of 
Christ  now  under  consideration,  that  children  dying 
in  infancy  and  going  to  heaven,  as  we  believe  they 
all  do,  remain  permanently  as  children,  in  it.  This 
idea  is  expressed  in  a  favorite  hymn,  commencing : 

"  Around  the  throne  of  God  in  heaven, 
Thousands  of  children  stand." 

But  this  hj^mn  was  designed  to  express  a  child's 
idea  of  heaven.  Viewed  as  a  child's  poetic  fancy, 
the  thought  is  unobjectionable  and  very  pleasing, 
but  as  a  reality,  it  is  shocking.  The  glory  of  heaven 
is  that  it  is  a  place  of  growth  very  far  more  rapid 
than  that  upon  eai'th  ;  that  an  infant  child  entering  it, 
leaps  up  to  the  maturity  of  a  man  in  tlie  flesh  in  a 
very  short  time.  A  mother  fondling  her  little  babe  is 
most  happy  in  its  littleness,  but  let  her  know  that  it 
is  always  to  remain  so,  and  her  joy  is  at  once  turned 
into  grief  too  great  to  be  borne.  The  great  charm  of 
little  infants  is  that  they  are  germs  of  an  immediate, 
never-ceasing  and  ever-increasing  development. 

When  the  Saviour  would  show  his  Avrangling  dis- 
ciples that  greatness  consisted  in  humility,  he  took  a 
little  child  and  set  him  in  their  midst.  He  did  this 
not  because  children  are  any  more  humble  than  those 
older,  but  solely  because  it  was  little  in  stature  and, 
as  such,  a  true  picture  of  those  who  esteem  them- 
selves small  and  unworthy,  and  delight,  most  of  all, 


APPENDIX.  251 

in  ministering  to  others  as  better  than  themselves. 
He  would  have  set  forth  precisely  the  same  truth  by 
holding  up  before  them  a  little  bit  of  gold  or  silver, 
or  a  grain  of  sand ;  but  the  gold  one  would  be  more 
attractive  than  that  of  silver  and  sand,  and  the  little 
child  very  far  more  attractive  than  that  of  gold,  be- 
cause of  its  intrinsic  charms.  The  Saviour  was  re- 
markable for  the  use  of  the  most  pleasing  symbols  in 
all  his  teachings. 

Sentiment  unrestrained  by  reason  has  had  altogether 
too  much  to  do  in  the  interpretation  of  these  passages 
relating  to  little  children  which  we  have  been  consid- 
ering. 


APPENDIX  C. 

The  Mode  Question  in  a  Nutshell. 

Decisive  Testimony  of  the  Last  Command  of  Christ. 
—Mark  16:  15,16. 

Baptists  maintain  that  immersion  is  absolutely 
essential  to  a  baptism  ;  that,  without  it  there  cannot 
be  a  real  one.  Upon  this  claim  they  justify  their 
denominational  separation  from  many  other  evan- 
gelical bodies.  They  must  make  and  maintain  this 
claim,  as  that  alone  can  justify  their  exclusive  posi- 
tion. If  there  may  be  and  are  valid  baptisms  without 
immersion,  then  it  is  possible  that  they  may,  in  some 
instances  at  least,  have  other  equivalent  modes. 
Take  away  this  their  claim,  and  you  remove  one  of 
the  most  essential  foundation  rocks  upon  which  the 
denomination  rests,  so  far  as  the  mode  question  is 
concerned.  This  will  not  be  denied,  but  cheerfully 
confessed,  by  Baptists  themselves.  It  is  the  purpose 
of  this  appendix  to  show  that  the  last  command  of 
Christ  disproves  this  their  claim. 

In  that  command  Christ  bids  his  disciples  :  "  Go 
ye  into  all  the  world  and  preach  the  Gospel  to  every 
creature.  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall 
be  saved;  but  he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  con- 
demned." He  gives  both  the  positive  and  negative 
side  of  that  part  which  sets  forth  the  conditions  of 
the  salvation  offered.  He  announces  both  the  re- 
ward of  rightly   receiving   their   message,   and    the 


APPENDIX.  253 

penalty  of  rejecting  it.  The  antithesis  is  very  em- 
phatic. The  last  clause  is  elliptical,  and  the  ellipsis 
must  be  supplied.  The  two  antithetic  clauses,  filled 
out,  read  thus :  "  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized 
shall  be  saved  ;  but  he  that  believeth  not,  and  is  not 
baptized,  shall  be  condemned." 

It  is  in  accordance  with  universal  usage  thus  to 
shorten,  by  ellipsis,  the  second  member  of  an  antithe- 
sis when  the  full  first  one  makes  evident  what  is 
omitted. 

The  supposition  that  he  did  not  mention  baptism 
in  the  second  member  because  it  is  not  essential  to 
salvation  makes  his  statement  of  the  conditions  very 
infelicitous,  not  to  say  bungling.  Why  did  he  not, 
for  the  same  reason,  omit  baptized  in  the  first? 
According  to  that  supposition,  the  second  and 
shorter  interprets  the  first  and  fuller — a  palpable 
reversal  of  universal  usage.  To  our  minds,  the 
most  natural,  the  most  in  accordance  with  usage, 
and  the  only  legitimate  rendering  of  the  two  ver- 
bally differing  clauses  as  in  harmony,  is  the  one 
here  given. 

The  command,  then,  makes  baptism  actually  essen- 
tial to  salvation.  Those,  and  only  those  who  in  faith 
receive  the  baptism  there  enjoined,  shall  be  saved ; 
none  others  can  be  ;  no  exceptions  made  nor  allowed. 
Now  nothing  can  be  more  certain  and  undisputed  in 
evangelical  bodies  than  that  immersion  is  not  essen- 
tial to  salvation.  That  many  die  and  go  to  heaven 
who  never  have  been  immersed  is  admitted  by  all. 
They  must,  therefore,  have  received  in  some  way 
that  enjoined  baptism  which  Christ  made  essential  to 


254  APPENDIX. 

salvation.  It  follows  that  immersion,  not  being 
essential  to  salvation,  cannot  be  essential  to  that 
baptism  in  the  cominand  which  is  essential  to  it.  If 
not  essential  to  salvation,  it  cannot  be  essential  to 
anything  which  is  essential  to  the  same.  It  may  be 
a  symbol  of  it,  but  it  cannot  be  an  essential  part.  It 
should  be  remembered  that  Christ's  mind  was  always 
upon  the  substance  pictured  by  a  form,  and  used  the 
latter  simply  as  a  name  or  photograph  of  the  former. 
"  This  cup  is  my  blood."  With  him,  baptism  was 
the  washing  of  regeneration,  and  an}^  form  express- 
ing it,  simply  a  mirror.  It  always  occurred  at  the 
time  of  conversion.  One,  when  becoming  a  believer, 
at  the  same  time  received  baptism — the  washing  of 
regeneration ;  and  the  outward  form,  afterwards 
administered,  was  only  an  impressive  picture  of  what 
had  previously  taken  place.  For  this  reason  Christ 
puts  believing  and  baptism  together,  as  both  alike 
essential  to  salvation. 

In  view  of  what  we  have  now  learned,  the  two 
clauses  may  read  thus :  He  that  believeth  and 
receiveth  that  baptism  wliich  is  symbolized  by  bap- 
tismal water  (bating  exceptional  cases)  shall  be 
saved,  but  he  that  believeth  not,  and  does  not 
receive  that  baptism,  shall  be  condemned.  Again 
(in  deference  to  Baptist  preferences):  He  that 
believeth  and  receiveth  that  baptism,  which,  in  all 
future  time,  is  to  be  symbolized  by  immersion  (bating 
exceptional  cases)  shall  be  saved ;  but  he  that  does 
not  believe  and  does  not  receive  it  shall  be  con- 
demned. Once  more :  He  that  believeth  and 
receiveth  that  baptism  which  is  now  usually  symbol- 


APPENDIX.  255 

ized  by  immersion  (this  form  to  be  changed  as  the 
circumstances  of  exceptional  cases  and  those  of  com- 
ing ages  shall  demand)  shall  be  saved  ;  but  he  that 
does  not  believe  and  receive  it  shall  be  condemned. 
We  incline  to  the  opinion  that  this  last  rendering 
accurately  expresses  the  mind  of  Christ.  We  think 
it  most  probable  that  immersion  was  generally,  not 
exclusively,  practised  in  Christ's  time,  and  that  he 
had  that  form  in  view  as  the  one  for  use  in  the  imme- 
diate future  when  he  gave  the  command.  But  the 
whole  tenor  of  all  his  teachings  and  doings  makes  us 
certain  that  he  looked  upon  the  form  as  changeable 
with  circumstances,  and  wished  his  disciples,  of  all 
times,  to  look  u^^on  it  in  tlie  same  way. 

The  advocates  of  immersion,  as  the  onl}^  admissi- 
ble mode,  in  all  times  and  places,  protest  against  any 
change  in  any  case  as  always  sinful ;  but,  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  the  most  strenuous  of  them,  in  this  respect, 
do  make  in  it  the  most  radical  change  possible.  In 
some  cases  they  entirely  set  aside  immersion.  They 
do  not  immerse  one  sick  and  near  unto  death,  right  in 
the  hearing  of  Christ's  voice,  to  him.  If  you  are  not 
baptized,  you  shall  he  condemned.  They  thus  set  it 
aside,  not  only  when  it  would  be  fatal  to  life,  but 
also  when  it  would  be  onl}^  greatly  inconvenient.  In 
most  such  cases  they  might,  by  taking  sufficient  pains, 
safel}^  give  immersion.  They  could  build  a  baptistry 
in  tlie  sick-room,  make  the  water  of  the  requisite 
temperature,  and  with  the  help  of  several  strong, 
yet  gentle,  hands,  immerse  one  when  close  to  the 
gates  of  death  without  harm.  But  they  rightly  do 
not  baptize  such,  simply  and   only  on  the  score  of 


256  APPENDIX. 

great  inconvenience.  Thus  to  set  aside  a  form,  is  to 
inflict  the  greatest  change  conceivable  — from  some- 
thing aivay  down  to  notJiing.  If  immersion  is  abso- 
lutely essential  to  the  baptism  here  enjoined  by 
Christ,  and  by  him  made  essential  to  salvation,  then 
it  ought  to  be  administered  to  all  such  at  whatever 
cost  of  effort.  It  ought  to  be,  even  if  certain  that 
death  will  immediately  follow  in  consequence.  Infi- 
nitely better  to  lose  this  life  than  the  immortal  soul. 
But  this  is  not  the  only  most  radical  change  which 
Baptists  make  in  divinely-appointed  ordinances.  They 
set  aside  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  in  the 
case  of  all  such;  —  change  a  great  and  most  holy 
feast  to  nothing.  They  do  not  give  the  consecrated 
bread  and  cup,  of  which  all  Christ's  disciples  are  re- 
quired to  partake,  to  those  from  whom  they  with- 
hold immersion  because  of  great  mconvenience.  If 
the  symbol  of  baptism  can,  without  sin,  be  given 
such  a  most  radical  change  for  convenience's  sake, 
it  is  difhcult  to  see  why  those  far  less  radical  may  not, 
for  a  like  reason,  be  rightly  given  it.  As  we  have 
learned  our  blessed  Lord,  and  so  knowing  him  to 
delight  in  mercy  rather  than  in  sacrifice,  we  are  com- 
pelled to  believe  him  exceedingly  well  pleased  with 
this  change  by  Baptists,  in  the  case  of  baptism  (not 
the  supper),  because  a  serious  inconvenience,  and 
-also  the  much  less  ones  by  those  who  pour  or 
sprinkle. 

God,  as  a  Father  of  infinite  kindness,  does  not  take 
delight  in  the  inconveniences  borne  by  his  children 
simply  as  such.  He  imposes  no  penances  for  the 
purpose  of  inflicting  purif3dng  sufferings,  excepting 


APPENDIX.  257 

as  they  come  naturally  and  unavoidably  to  tliem 
when  doing  his  work.  He  rejoices  to  have  them 
take  the  most  convenient  way  in  performing  the  ser- 
vice assigned  them. 

It  may  be  that  some  will  object  that  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  paragraph  in  Mark,  containing  this  com- 
mand, is  disputed.  But  the  same  conclusion  comes 
from  other  rightly-interpreted  passages  of  undis- 
puted genuineness.  Christ  said  to  Nicodemus :  If 
a  man  experiences  that  new  birth  which  is  symbol- 
ized by  water  and  is  the  work  of  the  Spirit,  he  can 
see,  and  will  enter  into,  the  kingdom  of  God;  but  if 
he  does  not  experience  the  same,  he  cannot  see,  and 
will  not  enter  into,  that  kingdom.  Again,  Peter 
said  to  the  conscience-stricken  Jews :  Repent  and 
receive  that  baptism  which  will  here  be  symbolized 
by  immersion,  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  unto  the 
remission  of  your  sins,  and  ye  shall  receive  the  gift 
of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  but  if  you  do  not  repent  and  do 
not  receive  that  baptism,  ye  shall  not  receive  that 
gift.  Still  another:  The  command  of  Paul  to  the 
terrified  jailor,  filled  out,  reads  thus :  Believe  on  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  receive  that  baptism  which  is 
symbolized  by  baptismal  water,  and  thou  shalt  be 
saved,  thou  and  thy  house ;  but  if  you  do  not  believe 
and  do  not  receive  that  baptism,  you  will  not  be 
saved,  etc. 

It  seems  to  us  that  each  and  every  one  of  these 
three  passages  unite  with  the  great  command  of 
Christ  in  making  baptism  essential  to  salvation,  and 
justify  our  contention  that  immersion,  not  being  es- 
sential to  it,  cannot  be  essential  to  the  baptism  here 
18 


258  APPENDIX. 

enjoined  by  Christ ;  also  that  the  fact  that  the  most 
radical  change  possible  of  its  immersion-form,  for 
convenience's  sake,  is  rightly  made  by  Baptists,  jus- 
tifies, as  not  necessarily  wrong,  the  less  radical  ones 
made  use  of  by  those  who  pour  or  sprinkle. 

Note.— On  page  3,  the  page  heading  should  be  "  Preliminary  State- 
ments." 

On  page  95,  twelfth  line  from  the  top,  the  figure  (1)  should  be  in  the 
preceding  line  before  "  To  be  their  God." 

On  page  163,  foot-note,  "Appendix  B  "  should  be  "Appendix  C." 


SUBJECTS. 


Abrahamic  Church,  80-93,  129;  Covenant,  94-98:  Symbol,  99- 
102. 

Adamic  Church,  108;  Covenant,  108;  Symbol,  110. 

Baptist  Pedo-baptists— All  Baptists  who  faithfully  consecrate 
their  children  and  train  them  for  God's  service,  225,  226. 

Baptized— Certain  Fathers  not  in  infancy,  222,  223;  Children 
into  the  name  of  the  Trinity,  239-246. 

Binding  Others— Rightly  done  in  every  baptism,  both  adult 
and  infant,  8-12;  in  numerous  other  cases,  9-13;  the  fun- 
damental principle.  11. 

Bow  in  the  Cloud — Xoachian  Covenant  Symbol,  114,  115. 

Case — A  Supposed  one,  illustrative,  36-47. 

Child,  a  baptized  one — All  the  obligations  of  a  believer  im- 
posed, 6;  solemnly  bound,  2-8;  not  a  member  of  the  church, 
196,  199;  in  endearing  relations  to  it,  199. 

Child  of  God— Xot  entitled  to  baptism  simply  as  such,  204. 

Circumcision — Abrahamic  Covenant  Symbol,  99-101;  its  two 
distinct  functions,  80;  its  definitions,  99-101. 

Common— To  all  believers,  90,  91  (foot-note),  92,  99,  101;  the 
essential  features  of  all  divine  ordinances  are,  91  (foot- 
note). 

Christian  Church,  131-143;  Covenant,  140, 148;  Symbol,  149-159. 

Coincidences — Incidental  ones,  179;  a  remarkable  one,  179-184. 

Council— At  Jerusalem,  163,  169;  bearing  of  its  proceedings, 
169-170. 

Degeneracies  and  reformations  alternating,  'tO=^80r  /  IL  !<  /  -L3^ 

Discipline— In  Abrahamic  Church,  77,  126,  127. 

Disparagement — Of  Circumcision  by  Paul,  171,  172. 

Drama  in  Two  Scenes — Illustrative,  36-47. 

Evil  Tendencies — True  of  all  ordinances,  50,  51. 

Faith— Absolutely  essential  to  a  valid  baptism,  6,  7,  17;  a  valid 
church  membership,  18,  19;  a  valid  citizenship  in  the 
state,  80,  81. 

Family*- A  composite,  not  an  ultimate,  unit  in  church  or  state, 
98;  a  divinely  organized  community,  89;  a  believing  one  a 
church  in  miniature,  89;  family  element  modified,  140,  141. 


260  SUBJECTS. 

Females — Virtually  circumcised,  152,  153;  the  form  merged 
into  that  of  the  males,  152,  153. 

Forms — Of  Abrahamic  Institutions,  187;  their  mission  in  the 
Christian  Age,  187,  189. 

Genuine  Pedo-baptists — Their  high  Christian  character,  225; 
historic  object  lessons,  225. 

Immersion — Not  essential  to  a  valid  baptism,  252-253. 

Infant  Baptism— Its  theory,  etc.,  1-4;  not  inherently  wrong, 
5-25;  most  useful,  25-51. 

Infant  Communion — Its  apostolic  origin,  claimed  by  Augus- 
tine, not  sufficiently  confirmed,  222. 

Inferences — From  universality  of  moral  precepts,  58-65. 

Kingdom  of  Heaven— As  defined  by  Christ,  133-137;  by  the 
author,  137,  138;  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  v/ithin  you,  138, 
139. 

Lawmakers — Every  man  by  right  a  lawmaker  and  governor, 
11-13. 

Mode-Question— In  a  nutshell,  252,  258. 

Moral  Precepts— Their  substance  universal  benevolence,  55,  56; 
their  forms  changeable,  57;  binding  always  and  every- 
where, 60;    never  done  away,  58,  59;    their  universality, 

56,  57. 

Observance — Not  observed  by  many  in  Pedo-baptist  churches, 

234. 
Noachian  Church,  113;  Covenant,  113;  Symbol,  114. 
Ordinances — Simply  organized  forms  of  ordinary  experiences, 

116-119;  their  germ  seeds,  116,  117. 
Parents — Their  part  in  the  rite,  7;  their  conflict  with  Satan, 

32,  33;  eleventh  chapter  of  Hebrews,  33. 
Parties — In  a  baptism,  7,  18. 
Peculiar  People,    God's    Abrahamic,   have    all   the    essential 

features  of  a  church,  89-91. 
Persistency  and   Constancy   of   Physical    Force — Illustrative, 

57,  58. 

Principles — Two  coordinate  ones,  17,  18;  a  fundamental  one  of 

moral  government,  11,  12. 
Proof  Texts,  32-54;  proselyte  baptisms,  185,  186. 
Protestantism — Its  grand  principles  not  violated,  18,  203. 
Questions — Twelve  practical  ones,  195-206. 
Reason — Argument  from,  5-51. 
Rejection — By  a  few  in  the  earlier  centuries,  now  widespread, 

230,  231. 


SUBJECTS.  261 

Results— Great  and  good,  26-29;  sometimes  sadly  disappoint- 
ing, 30-36. 
Rite— As  affected  by  claims  of  Higher  Criticism,  120,  121,  206. 
Separation,  between  believing  and  non-believing;  church — Line 

of,  76-80,  126,  127;  its  historical  development,  141. 
Serpents— Universal  aversion  for,  110;    the  Adamic  covenants 

symbol,  110,  111. 
Symbols— A  universal   necessity,   104,   105;    the   Adamic  and 

Noachian  not  administered  to  their  persons,  112-115. 
Transitions— Wise  and  kind  ones,  191,  193;  orchard  analogy, 

193,  194. 
Treatise — A  satisfactory  one  the  great  necessity  of  the  rite, 

234,  235. 
Unitj'^ — Organic,  64;  of  all  moral  precepts,  64;  analogy  from 

that  of  the  physical  universe,  64,  65. 
Universality— Of  moral  precepts  and  institutions,  55-56;  of  all 

the  Jewish  sacrificial  precepts,  62,  63. 
Usefulness — Very  great,  26-51. 
Voyage  at  sea— Illustrative,  179-184. 
Washing— The  feet  of  Judas  by  Christ,  20-23. 
Wrong — Not  inherently  so,  5-25. 

AUTHORS   AND   WRITINGS   QUOTED. 

Apostolic  Fathers,  208,  209;  Arnold,  Dr.  A.  J.,  225;  Augustine, 

221,  222. 
Basil  the  Great,  219. 
Chrysostom,  220;  Cyprian,  217. 
Dana,  Professor,  64,  65. 
Gregory  Nazianzen,  217,  218. 
Hill,  Dr.  Thomas,  63. 
Hovey,  Prof.  Alva,  131. 
Irenaeus,  210,  211. 
Jerome,  with  others  not  baptized  in  infancy,  222,  223;  Justin 

Martyr,  209. 
Knapp,  186,  187. 

Mckeen,  Dr.,  15,  16;  Mclaren,  Dr.,  147. 
Neander,  226-230. 
Origen,  213-217. 
Pelagius,  220,  221. 

Smith,  Dr.  W.,  186;   Sunday- School  Times,  73,  74,  147. 
Teachings  of  the  Apostles,  109,  110;  Tertullian,  111-113. 
Wiberg,  209,  217,  222;  Williams,  Roger,  15,  16. 


0 


